UtKARY 

SAN  DIEGO 


I 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/elementsofchristOOhaleiala 


THE  ELEMENTS  OF  CHRISTIAN  DOCTRINE,  AND 
ITS  DEVELOPMENT: 


FIVE   SERMONS 


PREACHED    BEFORE   THE 


SOUTH    CONGREGATIONAL    SOCIETY,   BOSTON, 


In  January,  February,  and  March,  1860, 


^nn  ^rinteti  at  its  Request. 


"  H«  B&ith  imto  thno,  Bnt  whom  say  je  that  I  am  ?  And  Simon  Peter  annrered  and  s^d.  Then  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the 
living  God.  And  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  hhn,  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Bar-jona :  .  . .  .  upon  Udj  rock  I  will  build  my 
cfauTch."  —  Matt.  ivi.  15-18. 

n. 

«<  Other  fotmdattoQ  can  no  man  laj  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ.*'  —1  Cob.  !U.  11. 

in. 

**Now.  if  any  man  build  upon  this  foundation  gokl,  silTer,  precious  stones,  wood,  hay,  stubble,  every  man's  work  shall  be  made 
manifeft :  for  the  day  shall  declare  it,  because  it  shall  be  revealed  by  fire  ;  and  the  fire  shall  irj  ever^  man's  work^  of  what  sort 
Uia."— ICoB.  Ui.  12,13. 

IV. 
"Te  believe  in  God  :  believe  also  In  me."  —  Jobm  xiv.  1. 

V. 
*'  And  I  will  pray  the  Father,  and  he  shall  give  you  another  Comforter,  that  he  may  abide  with  you  for  ever."— Joen  ziv.  16. 


BY  EDWARD  E.   HALE. 


BOSTON: 
WALKER,    WISE,    AND    COMPANY, 

245,   Washington   Street. 

1860. 


BOSTON: 

printed  by  john  wilson  and  son, 

22,  School  Street. 


FIYE   SERMONS. 


I. 

"  He   SAITH  UNTO   THEM,  BuT  WHOM    SAT  TE  THAT  I  AM  ?      AnD    SiMON  PeTEH 
ANSWERED    AND    SAID,    TmOU    AKT    THE    ChKIST,   THE    SoN    OF    THE   LIVING 

God.  And  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  Blessed  art  thou, 
Simon  Bar-jona:  .  .  •  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church."  — 
Matt.  xvi.  15-18. 

Our  Saviour  meant  to  build  a  church.  The  truth  stated  by 
Peter  is  the  foundation  of  it.  It  is  built  upon  this  rock,  that 
Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God.  The  declara- 
tion of  Jesus  bears  this  meaning  only,  unless  we  accept  the 
forced  interpretation  of  the  Roman  Catholics,  and  suppose 
that  Simon  Peter,  the  son  of  Jonas,  is  the  corner-stone. 

It  is,  indeed,  a  critical  moment  when  Jesus  speaks.  The 
moment  is  fitted,  above  all  others,  for  a  clear  and  full 
declaration  of  the  foundation  of  his  church.  The  Galilean 
multitude  has  tried  to  make  him  king.  He  has  withdrawn 
from  their  instances,  and  from  the  jealousy  of  Herod,  out  of 
Galilee  to  Csesarea.  The  end  of  his  ministry  among  his 
countrymen  has  come.  He  is  about  to  leave  them  and  GaH- 
lee  to  go  to  Jerusalem,  and  face  his  most  bitter  enemies. 
"  In  every  respect,  this  was  the  natural  and  fitting  time  for 
the  decisive,  explicit  communication  of  the  one  essential  cha- 
racteristic truth  of  his  religion."  At  this  moment,  he  asks 
Peter  (the  head  of  the  apostles)  what  his  view  of  that  truth 
is.      It  proves  that  Peter  understands  it.      He  pronounces 


it  in  a  sharp  epigram,  for  which  the  church  has  always 
thanked  him.  The  church  has  really  taken  as  its  foundation 
the  truth  which  he  laid  down.  Well  may  we  listen  with 
reverent  curiosity,  well  may  we  take  to  heart  the  words,  when 
the  Master  speaks  of  the  truth  they  convey  as  the  comer-stone 
of  his  edifice.  Peter's  bold  statement  is,  that  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth, who  was  at  that  moment  exiled  from  his  country,*  is  the 
Anointed,  —  the  Christ ;  that  he  is,  indeed,  the  Son  of  the 
living  God. 

On  that  truth,  Jesus  meant  to  build  his  church,  if,  in  his 
own  words,  we  are  to  find  his  own  meaning.  I  believe  that 
we  are.  I  believe  we  find  his  meaning  there  undisguised, 
and  that  we  find  the  whole  of  it.  I  believe  that  history  has 
made  good  his  assertion,  and  has  illustrated  his  meaning. 
His  church  exists.  It  has  spread  over  this  world,  subdued 
this  world,  governed  this  world,  re-created  this  world,  as  not 
the  most  intense  prophecy  of  that  day  declared  it  would  in  so 
few  centuries.  It  grows  more  powerful  and  more.  It  com- 
pels government  to  obey  it,  and  literature  and  science.  It 
heals  the  broken-hearted  ;  it  opens  the  eyes  of  the  bhnd ; 
and  slowly,  but  surely,  frees  the  captive.  His  kingdom 
comes,  with  the  certainty  of  eternal  power ;  and  his  church 
is  the  agent  by  which  it  comes.  Or,  to  take  the  figure 
of  this  text,  the  shelter  of  his  church  becomes  wider  and 
wider ;  her  roofs  and  spires  and  domes  welcome  more  wor- 
shippers and  more,  —  are  the  homes  of  the  devotion  of  more 
hearts  and  more.  Every  land  bears  up  her  crosses  where  they 
may  flash  in  the  sun ;  every  breeze  curls  her  incense  as  it 
rises  to  the  living  God.  And  of  this  whole  great  fabric, 
wide  as  the  world  as  it  extends,  there  is  one  foimdation,  and 
one  only  ;  which  is,  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  and  that  he  is 
the  Son  of  that  Hving  God. 

*  CiEsarea  Philippi  was,  at  this  time,  in  the  province  of  Trachonitis,  in  the  juris- 
diction of  the  Philip  whose  wife  Herod  of  Galilee  had  taken.  Matt.  xiv.  13,  34;  xv. 
21:  and  xvi.  13, — all  indicate,  that,  after  the  death  of  John,  Jesus  retired  from 
Herod's  jurisdiction,  or  from  public  appearance  in  it,  until  he  was  ready  to  go  to 
Jerusalem  (Matt.  xix.  1). 


History  thus  illustrates  what  he  said ;  and  so  illustrates  it, 
that  it  is  no  longer  a  prophecy,  but  ah*eady  a  majestic  jtruth 
of  the  past  as  well  as  of  the  future. 

I  believe  that  it  is  not  only  the  truth,  but  that  it  is  the 
whole  truth.  I  believe,  that  is,  that  the  chvuxh  has  no  other 
foundation.  Jesus  is  the  Chi'ist,  the  Son  of  the  living  God ; 
and  that  is  the  complete  statement  of  his  being.  His  church 
stands  on  that  statement  only ;  and  it  is  enough  for  it  to  stand 
upon. 

When,  however,  I  say  that  Jesus  here  clearly  expressed 
the  whole  truth,  you  know  that  I  differ  from  many  theolo- 
gians. There  has  gradually  been  wrought  into  form  a  con- 
viction, which  was  not  always  bold  enough  to  find  statement, 
that  in  Jesus'  intercourse  with  men,  even  with  hi^  apostles, 
he  was  obliged  to  maintain  a  certain  "  reserve ; "  that  his 
statements  to  them,  therefore,  do  not  so  much  reveal  the 
whole  truth,  as  contain  it  under  a  veil ;  and  that  even  some 
centuries  were  needed  before  that  veil  could  be  wholly  drawn 
away.  Thus  the  Roman- Catholic  Church,  at  the  present 
time,  has  abandoned  the  effort  to  sustain  its  creed  principally 
by  the  authority  of  Scripture.  Granting  more  frankly,  that,  in 
Scripture,  that  creed  exists,  only  so  covered,  that  no  man,  even 
with  the  help  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  can  deduce  it  from  Scrip- 
ture aione,  the  Komanist  teaches  that  it  was  the  business  of 
the  church  gradually  to  develop  the  creed,  and,  from  time  to 
time,  to  give  it  statement  which  it  had  not  before.  With 
reference  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  for  instance,  the 
Roman  Church  acknowledges  that  the  Fathers  of  the  first 
three  hundred  years  seem  to  favor  the  Unitarian  hypothesis. 
*'  The  early  creeds,"  says  Bishop  Newman  of  that  church,  its 
recent  convert  from  the  church  of  England,  "  make  no  men- 
tion in  their  letter  of  the  Catholic  doctrine  at  all.  They 
make  mention,  indeed,  of  a  Three :  but  that  there  is  any 
mystery  in  the  doctrine  that  the  Three  are  One ;  that  they  are 
co-equal,  co-eternal,  all  increate,  all  omnipotent,  all  incom- 
prehensible, —  is  not  stated,  and  never  could  be  gathered  from 


them."*  —  "  The  definition  of  our  Lord's  proper  divinity,"  he 
says  in  another  place,  "  was  the  work  of  the  fourth  century."  f 

*  He  continues :  "  Of  course,  we  believe  that  they  imply  it,  or  rather  intend  it. 
God  forbid  we  should  do  otherwise !  But  nothing  in  the  mere  letter  of  these  docu- 
ments leads  to  that  belief.  To  give  a  deeper  meaning  to  their  letter,  we  mast 
interpret  them  by  the  times  which  came  after. 

"  Again:  there  is  one,  and  only  one,  great  doctrinal  council  in  ante-Nicene  times. 
It  was  held  at  Antioch,  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  on  occasion  of  the  inci- 
pient innovations  of  the  Sj'rian  heretical  school.  Now,  the  Fathers  then  assembled, 
for  whatever  reason,  condemned,  or  at  least  withdrew,  when  it  came  into  the 
dispute,  the  word  '  Homoousian,'  which  was  received  at  Nicsea  as  the  special  sym- 
bol of  Catholicism  against  Arins. 

"  Again :  the  six  great  bishops  and  saints  of  the  ante-Nicene  Church  were  St. 
Irenffius,  St.  Hippolytus,  St.  Cyprian,  St.  Gregory  Thaumaturgus,  St.  Dionysius 
of  Alexandria,  and  St.  Methodius.  Of  these,  St.  Dionysius  is  accused  by  St. 
Basil  of  having  sown  the  first  seeds  of  Arianism;  and  St.  Gregory  is  allowed,  by 
the  same  learned  Father,  to  have  used  language  concerning  our  Lord  which  he 
only  defends  on  the  plea  of  an  economical  object  in  the  writer.  St.  Hippolytus 
speaks  as  if  he  were  ignorant  of  our  Lord's  eternal  Sonship;  St.  Methodius  speaks 
incorrectly  at  least  upon  the  incarnation;  and  St.  Cyprian  does  not  treat  of  theology 
at  all.  Such  is  the  incompleteness  of  the  extant  teaching  of  these  true  saints,  and, 
in  their  day,  faithful  witnesses  of  the  eternal  Son. 

"  Again :  Athenagoras,  St.  Clement,  Tertullian,  and  the  two  saints  Dionysii,  would 
appear  to  be  the  only  writers  whose  language  is  at  any  time  exact  and  systematic 
enough  to  remind  us  of  the  Athanasian  Creed.  If  we  limit  our  views  to  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Fathers  by  what  thej'  expressly  state,  St.  Ignatius  may  be  considered  as 
a  Patripassian,  St.  Justin  Arianizes,  and  Hippolytus  is  a  Photinian. 

"Again:  there  are  three -great  doctrinal  writers  of  the  ante-Nicene  centuries, — 
Tertullian,  Origen,  and,  we  may  add,  Eusebius,  though  he  lived  some  way  into  the 
fourth.  Tertullian  is  heterodox  on  the  doctrine  of  our  Lord's  divinity,  and,  indeed, 
ultimately  fell  altogether  into  heresy  or  schism;  Origen  is,  at  the  very  least,  sus- 
pected, and  must  be  defended  and  explained  rather  than  cited  as  a  wjjness  of 
orthodoxy;    and  Eusebius  was  an  Arian. 

"  Moreover,  it  may  be  questioned  whether  any  ante-Nicene  Father  distinctly 
affirms  either  the  numerical  unity  or  the  co-equality  of  the  three  persons;  except, 
perhaps,  the  heterodox  Tertullian,  and  that  chiefly  in  a  work  written  after  he  had 
become  a  Montanist:  yet  to  satisfy  the  anti-Roman  use  of  "Quod  semper  quod 
ubique,  quod  ab  omnibus  "  ("  What  has  always  been  believed  by  everybody,  every- 
where;" the  canon  for  testing  belief,  proposed  by  St.  Vincentius  of  Liris),  surely 
ought  not  to  be  left  for  these  great  articles  of  doctrine  to  the  testimony  of  a  later  age. 

"  Further:  Bishop  Bull  allows  that '  nearly  all  the  ancient  Catholics  who  preceded 
Arius  have  the  appearance  of  being  ignorant  of  the  invisible  and  incomprehensible 
(iinmens(im)  nature  of  the  Son,  God;  an  article  expressly  contained  in  the  Athana- 
sian Creed,  under  the  sanction  of  its  anathema '  "  (Newman's  Essay  on  the  Develop- 
ment of  Doctrine,  pp.  14,  15,  American  edition).  It  must  be  remembered,  that  Dr. 
Newman  left  an  honorable  position  in  the  English  Church,  convinced  by  his  own 
argument.  He  is  now  a  bishop  in  the  Roman  Church.  Bishop  Bull,  whom  he 
quotes,  was  the  English  Bishop  of  Wells ;  and  is  one  of  the  highest  authorities  in 
the  theology  of  the  English  Church. 

t  Ibid.,  p.  188. 


So  it  was  not  till  the  fifth  century  that  the  latent  doctrine  of 
the  worship  of  the  Virgin  Mary  so  far  relieved  itself  from  its 
hiding-place  as  to  get  statement  in  words ;  *  that  is,  it  cannot 
be  found  earlier  in  Scriptm-e,  or  other  authoritative  statements 
of  the  church.  In  the  same  way,  the  doctrine,  that  Mary 
mother  was  bom  free  from  original  sin,  did  not  get  authori- 
tative statement  at  the  hands  of  that  church  till  the  8th  of 
December,  1854,  within  your  memory  and  mine.  In  like 
manner,  we  may  expect  that  church  to  go  on,  till  it  dies, 
developing  and  defining  other  doctrines  to  which  it  has  not 
yet  attained. 

Protestantism  began  with  such  a  protest  against  this  claim 
of  Rome,  as  for  a  time  threw  Protestantism  into  a  bhnd  idola- 
try of  the  letter  of  the  Scripture.  From  that  idolatry,  how- 
ever. Protestantism  has  now  so  far  receded,  that,  especially 
where  the  defence  of  a  favorite  creed  requires,  some  of  the 
strictest  Protestants  now  give  in  their  adhesion  to  the  same 
theory,  —  the  necessity  of  a  statement  more  perfect  than  that 
of  the  Gospels.  While  they  still  claim  that  the  Gospels  con- 
tain all  truth,  they  hold  that  they  so  contain  it  that  the  men 
of  their  time  did  not  wholly  understand-^t.  Thus  are  they 
relieved  wholly  from  the  necessity  of  following  the  first 
Fathers  into  any  of  their  latitudinarianism,  into  any  of  their 
Judaism,  into  any  of  their  Platonism,  or  into  ways  which 
might  lead  into  Romanism.  For  instance  :  the  most  popular 
Orthodox  German  critic  of  our  day  says  of  this  same  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  "  In  Christ's  identical  words,  the  dogma  of  the 
Trinity  is  presented  in  an  entirely  undeveloped  form,  and 
the  unfolding  of  the  mystery  is  committed  to  the-  scientific 
activity  of  the  church^  f  I  understand  this  to  be  the  view  of 
one  who  will  interest  you  much  more  than  even  the  leader 

*  "  The  recognition  of  the  place  which  St.  Mary  holds  in  the  economy  of  grace 
■was  reserved  for  the  fifth  century  "  (Ibid.,  p.  188).  It  is  worth  notice,  that  it  seems 
to  be  Athanasiiu  who  first  suggested  worship  to  her.  The  passage  is  in  the  essay  De 
Sanctissima  Deipar&,  or  "The  Most  Sacred  Mother  of  God"  (Athan.,  vol.  i. 
p.  1041). 

t  Olshausen,  at  Matt,  xxviii.  19. 


8 


of  the  English-Romanist  party  or  of  the  German-Evangelical 
party  :  I  mean,  of  our  esteemed  friend,  my  predecessor  in  this 
pulpit.  I  suppose,  however,  that  he  assigns  a  shorter  period 
for  the  development  of  doctrine.  He  says,  that  if  the  Mes- 
siah, while  "  appearing  in  human  form  among  the  rude  men 
of  that  day,  had  been  continually  affirming,  in  the  most 
unqualified,  sudden,  peremptory  manner,  his  divine  supre- 
macy, it  could  not  fail  to  confuse  and  bewilder  them,  if  not  to 
exasperate  them,  all  unprepared  for  it  as  their  ignorance  was, 
and  while  his  visible  shape  appeared  before  them.  Even  the 
comparatively  few  expressions  which  he  did  employ,  made 
more  distinct  and  fr-equent  as  his  '  hour '  approached,  threat- 
ened to  put  an  end,  and  did  finally  help  to  put  an  end,  to  his 
ministry  in  the  body.  The  truth  could  not  shine  forth  at 
once,  in  its  peerless  glory,  upon  eyes  so  dull.  He  contented 
himself,  in  his  wise  and  tender  condescension,  with  pronoun- 
cing these  comprehensive  and  weighty  declarations  of  his  com- 
plete oneness  with  the  Father ;  and  left  the  further  doctrine  of 
his  mysterious  nature  to  unfold  itseK  in  the  ripening  -wisdom 
of  his  church,  under  the  Holy  Spirit  which  he  promised." 

And,  in  another  place,  the  same  writer  says  of  Jesus'  idea 
in  paiting  from  the  Eleven,  "  In  a  remoter  and  calmer  period, 
his  worship  would  take  its  place  spontaneously  in  their 
hymns,  ejaculations,  and  litanies.  Meantime,"  —  that  is,  until 
that  remoter  and  calmer  period  comes,  —  "he  points  them 
to  the  Father,  in  whom  they  are  already  believing  with  a 
more  settled  and  definite  faith."  The  worship  of  the  Father 
is  to  be  their  religion  during  the  season  of  their  parting  from 
him.  The  more  mysterious  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  will  be 
revealed  to  them  in  calmer  and  remoter  days.* 


*  In  the  same  strain,  Alford  —  the  tender,  truly  Catholic,  and  learned  critic  of 
the  Greek  text  —  supposes,  that,  when  Jesus  died,  even  his  apostles  had  never 
heard  of  the  miracles  of  his  birth.  "  It  was  not  till  the  faith  of  the  apostolic 
Christians  was  fully  fixed  on  him  as  the  Son  of  God,  and  the  outline  of  his  person 
was  firmly  sketched  out,  that  the  Spirit  brought  out  those  historical  records  which 
assure  us  of  his  supernatural  conception  "  (Note  at  John  vi.  43).  Yet  Mary  mother 
was  living  while  they  were  all  thus  ignorant. 


I  had  proposed  devoting  one  or  two  sermons,  as  I  renew 
my  broken  course  of  service  here,  to  some  examination  of 
the  various  statements  which  are  made  regarding  the  founda- 
tion of  the  Christian  Church.  I  shall  try  to  show*,  in  these 
sermons,  why  I  adhere  to  Peter's  statement,  as  being  as 
complete  as  we  can  expect,  as  clear  as  we  can  ask.  My 
plan  had  been,  indeed,  to  preach  the  first  of  these  sermons 
to-day;  but,  on  reflection,  I  see  we  must  examine  a  pre- 
liminary question  first.  We  must  determine  the  authorities 
to  which  we  are  to  appeal.  How  far  does  the  development 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  the  original  doctrine  of  Christians, 
affect  the  original  doctrine  as  to  the  foundation  of  Christianity 
itseK  ?  that  is,  did  our  Lord  himself  clearly  explain  the  foun- 
dation to  his  disciples  ?  You  see  that  the  discussion  of  the 
Trinity  to-day  is  on  a  different  footing  from  what  it  stood  on 
fifty  years  ago.  Then,  in  our  community,  both  parties  held, 
that,  if  they  could  get  at  the  sense  of  Christ's  own  declara- 
tions, they  could  get,  not  only  at  his  doctrine  undeveloped, 
but  at  its  developed,  complete,  and  most  scientific  statement.* 
Now  we  have  to  ask,  whether  our  fathers  were  right  in  that 
supposition.  Are  we  to  be  satisfied  with  Christ's  declara- 
tions ?  or  are  we  to  take  them  with  the  occasional  comments 
of  St.  Paul,  or  the  fuller  declarations  of  the  councils  of  the 
fourth  century,  as  the  more  complete  foundations  of  our 
opinion  ? 

To  this  question,  I  ask,  first,  your  attention.  You  see,  of 
course,  the  interest  in  which  the  Roman  Church  presses  the 
development  theory.  Let  us  grant,  also,  that  a  grand  spiritual 
truth  rests  behind  its  view.  "  We  are  the  authority,"  says 
that  church.  "A  council  of  our  bishops,  summoned  and 
presided  over  by  the  popes,  has  an  inspiration  from  the  Holy 
Spirit,  which  is  superior  in  degree  and  in  kind  to  the  inspi- 
ration which  is  given  to  any  single  man.  No  single  man,  — 
no,  and  no  set  of  men,  unless  they  be  bishops  consecrated 


•  See,  for  instance,  Dr.  Worcester's  third  letter  to  Dr.  Ghanning,  pp.  12,  13. 

2 


10 


by  the  apostolic  succession,  meeting  at  the  call  of  St.  Peter's 
successor  —  has  a  right  to  define  a  doctrine  of  religion.  No 
single  man,  —  no,  and  no  set  of  men  —  has  a  right  to  say 
what  the  words  of  Scripture,  though  they  were  the  simplest 
words  of  Jesus,  mean."  In  pressing  this  claim  it  is,  that 
the  Roman-Catholic  writers,  addressing  Episcopalian  Protes- 
tants, say,  "  You  are  obliged  to  come  to  us  for  your  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity;  you  are  obliged  to  come  to  us  for  your 
doctrine  as  to  the  sacraments.  You  take  the  authority  of  our 
Fathers  in  both  of  these  matters,  where  you  agree  with  them. 
You  have  no  authority  to  sustain  you  in  Scripture,  unless  you 
take  the  comment  the  Fathers  add  to  Scripture.  Why,  then, 
do  you  reject  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  ?  Why  do  you  reject 
the  doctrine  of  the  Pope's  supremacy  ?  to  which  those  same 
Fathers  bear  witness  much  more  frequently  than  to  the  other 
two.  *  You  accept  the  lesser  evidence ;  you  reject  the 
greater.' "  * 

I  quote  these  words  from  Newman,  the  great  leader  of 
the  English  "  Puseyites."  They  are  the  appeal  to  which 
so  many  of  the  English  clergy  have  responded  by  going  over 
to  the  church  of  Rome,  where  Bishop  Newman  himself  led 
the  way.  I  confess,  I  do  not  see  how,  logically,  they  could 
have  done  otherwise.  I  know  there  are  better  laws  than 
logical  laws  sometimes,  under  which  most  of  them  have 
found  shelter  :  and  I  do  see,  therefore,  how  nine-tenths  of 
the  clergy  of  the  church  of  England  were  wholly  indifferent 
to  Newman's  pitiless  appeal;  because  they  held  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Real  Presence  and  of  the  Trinity,  as  most  men 
do,  not  as  matters  of  argument,  but  of  sentiment.  They 
were  born  to  them,  and  they  let  them  lie  without  proof  and 
without  disproof.  But  when  the  appeal  came  to  a  logical, 
an  inqvuring,  perhaps  rather  sceptical  mind,  again  and  again 
saying,  "  Why  take  one  doctrine  on  the  authority  of  the 
Fathers,  and  reject  another  ?  "  —  I  can  see  how,  in  the  mere 

*  Bishop  Newman,  as  above,  p.  17. 


11 


pride  of  consistency,  such  men  went  over ;  and  I  believe  we 
shall  see  that  they  have  many  followers  from  that  midway 
position.  For  this  I  may  say,  that,  in  fifteen  years  since 
Newman  published  that  appeal,  —  and,  in  going  over  to 
Rome  at  the  same  time,  announced  his  own  answer  to  it,  — 
the  church  of  England  has  made  no  adequate  reply  to  it. 
With  that  singular  pohcy,  —  by  which  most  great  churches 
ignore  their  most  dangerous  enemies,  —  she  has  left  this 
question  of  questions,  whose  repetition  so  saps  her  living 
strength,  without  reply.     Or  is  it  that  she  has  none  ? 

What  does  the  church  of  Rome  say  to  us,  who  do  not 
hold  to  the  Fathers'  doctrine  of  the  sacraments,  nor  to  their 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  —  who  hold  that  there  was  an  early 
corruption  of  Christianity  from  external  sources  ? 

The  same  writer  (Bishop  Newman)  dismisses  us  with  these 
words :  "  This  view  has  no  claims  on  our  attention  till  it  is 
drawn  out  scientifically ;  till  we  are  distinctly  informed  what 
the  Christian  or  evangelical  message  is,  or  if  there  be  any ; 
from  what  sources  it  is  drawn,  how  those  sources  are  ascer- 
tained to  us,  and  what  is  a  corruption."  *  He  admits  our 
view  of  an  early  corruption  of  Christianity  to  be  a  plausible 
hypothesis,  —  certainly  sufiicient  to  account  for  the  present 
position  of  afiairs ;  but  he  dismisses  it,  even  without  exami- 
nation, until  its  friends  draw  it  out  scientifically.  Let  us  be 
scientijic,  though  we  die  ! 

I  am  very  sorry  to  detain  you  with  these  opinions  of 
difierent  leaders  of  opinion ;  but  we  must  have  some  notion 
of  them,  I  think,  if  we  are  to  come  at  any  clear  results 
in  our  inquiry. 

The  Protestant  Church,  as  I  said,  began  by  scouting  the 
whole  theory  of  development  of  doctrine.  "  The  letter  of  the 
Bible,"  it  cried,  "  and  nothing  more."  Practically,  however, 
something  more  came  in  everywhere.  Some  churches  kept 
their  old  ritual.     Every  church  took  the  view  of  the  Bible 

•  Newman,  as  above,  p.  18. 


12 


of  its  own  great  men.  Luther,  Calvin,  Knox,  Robinson, 
Edwards,  Chalmers,  and  Channing  could  not  fail  to  impress 
on  the  Bibles  which  they  interpreted  the  lessons  which  the 
Holy  Spirit  taught  them  as  they  studied.  As  Protestantism 
relaxed,  therefore,  from  its  first  horror  of  Rome ;  as  it  after- 
wai'ds  passed  through  its  first  fit  of  extreme  depression ;  as, 
a  century  ago  or  more,  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Ploly  Spirit 
began  to  find  place,  and  every  man  and  woman  got  more 
real  converse  with  God,  listened,  and  obeyed  God  in  con- 
science ;  as  He  told  of  truth  and  duty,  —  the  idolatrous 
worship  of  the  letter  of  the  Bible  has  given  way,  and  the 
Spirit  which  dictated  it  has  had  freer  course  and  freer.  The 
superstition  which  would  have  opened  the  volume  as  an 
oracle,  and  taken  the  first  text  which  came  as  a  guide  for 
immediate  duty,  exists  no  more.  Scarcely  more  does  the 
kindred  superstition  linger,  which,  in  any  argument  as  to 
duty  now  among  the  affairs  of  to-day,  would  take  a  single 
disconnected  text,  whether  from  the  Book  of  Chronicles  or 
the  Gospel  of  John,  and  say,  "  Tims  saith  the  Lord,"  in  the 
way  which  Cotton  Mather  would  have  done,  or  divines  still 
later.  In  proportion  as  men  grant  the  centre  of  Christian 
doctrine,  —  that  God  is  here,  guiding,  helping,  and  teaching 
each  reverent  child,  —  in  the  same  proportion  does  the  Bible 
become  a  living  revelation,  rather  than  a  dead  one ;  and  the 
child  looks  at  the  lesson  which  was  given  to  fishermen  in 
Galilee,  expecting  to  find  the  spirit  of  the  divine  life,  but  not 
necessarily  every  literal  injunction  for  the  complicated  duty 
of  London  or  of  Boston.  In  this  more  extended  view  of 
Scripture,  we  may  note  several  different  hypotheses. 

1.  There  is  the  theory  of  those  whom,  for  want  of  a  bet- 
ter name,  I  must  call  the  extreme  Rationalists.  They  look 
on  the  Old  Testament  as  what  happens  to  be  left  of  the 
literature  of  Palestine  and  the  neighborhood,  mostly  relating 
to  the  Jews,  —  a  race  especially  devoted  to  worship  and  reli- 
gious form.  Jesus  Christ  was  born  of  this  race,  they  say;  a 
remarkable  development  of  it.     Far  above  what  it  had  ever 


13 


uttered  before,  his  utterances  were  new  instruction,  and,  so 
far,  new  light,  to  the  world.  But  he  was  still  imbued  with 
some  of  the  prejudice  and  some  of  the  ignorance  of  his 
nation.  "We  must  judge  what  he  tells  us,  then,  by  the 
light  God  gives  to  us ;  and  accept  or  reject,  as  we  would  in 
listening  to  any  other  teacher.  He  taught  the  best  he  knew; 
but  he,  too,  was  liable  to  error. 

2.  I  may  note  the  series  of  views,  more  or  less  distinctly 
defined,  of  the  leading  Orthodox  divines,  which,  in  result, 
do  not  so  far  vary  from  this  Rationalistic  hypothesis.  Ex- 
tremes are  meeting  always.  In  every  religious  body  which 
has  a  detailed  creed  to  defend,  which  gives  no  freedom  to 
the  individual  inquirer,  we  shall  find  men  who  maintain 
what  the  Roman  Church  calls  the  discipline  of  secrecy.* 
"  It  is  maintained,  that  doctrines  which  are  associated  with 
the  later  days  of  the  church  were  really  in  the  church  from 
the  first,  but  not  publicly  taught,  and  that  for  various  rea- 
sons ;  as,  for  sake  of  reverence,  that  sacred  subjects  might 
not  be  profaned  by  the  heathen ;  and,  for  the  sake  of  cate- 
chumens, that  they  might  not  be  oppressed,  or  carried  away, 
by  a  sudden  communication  of  the  revealed  truth."  I 
use  the  words  of  one  of  the  advocates  of  this  view.  One 
of  the  early  Fathers f  states  it  thus  in  one  illustration:  "To 
the  carnal,  we  teach  the  gospel  in  a  literal  way,  preaching 
Jesus  Christ,  and  him  crucified ;  but  to  persons  farther 
advanced  we  communicate  the  Logos."  This  view  of  an 
esoteric  or  concealed  doctrine  is  not  peculiar  to  the  church 
of  Rome.  All  Protestants  hold  it  virtually  who  find  essen- 
tial truth  in  the  Epistles  which  they  do  not  find  in  the 
words  of  Christ.  All  Protestants  hold  it,  I  think,  who  say 
that  no  man  can  grasp  Christian  doctrine  until  he  is  con- 
verted, while  no  man  can  be  converted  unless  he  has 
grasped  Christian  doctrine.  The  modern  statement  of  the 
commentators,  that  Jesus'  words  contained  fundamental  truth, 

•  Disoiplina  Arcani.  t  Tertullian. 


14 


which  he  intentionally  veiled,  so  that  his  apostles  even  did 
not  apprehend  it,  belongs  to  the  same  hypothesis. 

It  differs  from  the  Rationalistic  theory  thus  :  That  teaches 
that  Jesus  taught  all  he  knew,  but  was  sometimes  in  error : 
this  teaches  that  he  knew  all  truth,  but,  when  he  testified, 
that  he  concealed  a  part  intentionally ;  so  veiling  it,  that  it 
should  only  be  developed  by  the  scientific  activity  of  after- 
days. 

3.  To  the  same  class  of  opinions,  I  might  refer  the  view  of 
those  writers  who  consider  Christ's  life  as  having  an  allegori- 
cal meaning  behind  its  apparent  meaning.  Dr.  Bushnell  is 
the  most  successful  representative  among  us  of  this  school 
of  thought,  in  which  the  New  Testament  is  a  drama.  But 
different  writers  of  this  school  use  its  latitude  in  diflferent 
ways ;  and  many  of  these  are  such  as  this  philosopher  would 
condemn.  Sometimes,  for  certain  ultimate  purposes,  Jesus 
assumes  the  position  of  a  sufferer,  and  represents  to  the  eyes 
of  men  bitter  and  extreme  agony.  Sometimes  God  has  pre- 
pared "  a  form  of  art  for  the  representation  of  Christ  and  his 
work."  The  whole  Passion  Week  is  called  a  "  tragedy,"  in 
the  sense  that  it  represents  something  behind.  The  whole 
gospel  is  spoken  of  as  an  sesthetic  or  artistic  method  of  ex- 
pression of  God.  Christ  is  not  so  much  God  or  man ;  but 
he  expresses  God  and  he  expresses  man.  Certain  repre- 
sentations appear  in  the  gospel  history ;  and,  to  the  gospel 
times,  they  are  reahties :  but,  to  the  eye  of  more  advanced 
science,  —  that  is,  of  this  holy,  diligent,  far-seeing,  self- 
satisfied  nineteenth  century,  for  instance,  —  it  is  clear  that 
they  are  not  in  themselves  real,  but  the  exhibition  of  real 
truth ;  which,  to  the  ignorance  of  those  who  looked  on, 
assumed  this  pictured  form.  So,  we  are  told,  it  is  given  to 
us  to  interpret  the  drama  which  simpler  ages  believed  was 
real.  » 

The  first  of  these  theories  of  development,  which  I  have 
called  the  Rationalistic,  would  say  that  our  text  expressed 
more  than  the  truth.     "  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God  "  —  would 


15 


be  the  comments  —  "  as  we  are  all  God's  children ;  but  when 
he  claimed  that  an  eternal  church  was  to  be  built  on  the 
truth,  that  he  was  the  Son  of  God,  he  let  a  Jewish  notion 
of  a  Messiah  creep  into  his  imaginations,  and  claimed  more 
than  was  true." 

In  the  second  of  these  theories,  the  Roman  Catholic  would 
say  that  Jesus  distinctly  expressed  less  than  the  truth ;  that 
he  just  hinted  at  the  truth,  and  left  the  church  to  develop 
and  expound  it.  That  Peter  was  the  comer-stone,  was  just 
hinted ;  and  Peter's  successors,  and  the  successors  to  the 
other  apostles,  were  left  to  draw  up,  from  that  hint,  the  doc- 
trine of  a  hierarchy  which  should  have  absolute  authority 
over  the  soul  of  man. 

The  Protestant- Orthodox  scholar  would  listen  to  this  ac- 
count of  development,  only  to  say  that  another  doctrine  lay 
hidden,  and  could  be  developed  from  what  appeared.  Jesus 
said,  undoubtedly,  that  the  foundation  of  his  church  was  in 
the  assertion,  that  he  was  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living 
God ;  but,  in  this  statement,  there  lay  undeveloped  the 
deeper  statement,  that  the  Son  of  the  living  God  is  the  living 
God.  Like  the  Romanist,  the  modem  Orthodox  critic  holds, 
that,  in  accommodating  his  language  to  the  imperfections  of 
his  hearers,  Jesus  distinctly  expresses  here  less  than  the 
whole  truth ;  leaving  the  rest,  for  remoter  times,  under  a 
veil. 

In  the  third  of  these  theories,  —  the  dramatic  theory, — 
it  would  be  said  that  the  text  was  a  part  of  a  representation 
which  the  eternal  God  had  condescended  to  make  for  his 
children.  To  make  it,  he  had  "  abated  his  attributes,"  — 
had  laid  aside  his  omnipotence,  his  omnipresence,  his  omni- 
science, as  so  many  crowns  of  glory  which  might  dazzle  his 
children.  He  walked  among  them  representing  man.  In 
that  attitude  he  said,  "  My  Father  is  greater  than  I ;  "  which, 
at  that  moment,  was  true.  In  that  attitude,  he  said  he  was 
the  Son  of  the  living  God ;  but,  so  soon  as  he  should  take 
again  the  jewels  he  had  left  aside,  he  would  become  the 


16 


living  God  himself  again.  The  language  is  the  language  of 
eternal  truth;  but  it  is  toned  down  to  human  accents,  and 
even  to  human  ignorance,  by  infinite  condescension.  An 
omnipotent  God  has  condescended  for  the  moment  to  "  do 
nothing  of  himself;  "  so  he  says,  "The  Son  can  do  nothing 
of  himself:  "  which,  at  the  moment  the  Son  is  in  Jerusalem, 
is  true ;  but,  so  soon  as  the  Son  ascends  into  heaven,  it  will 
be  true  no  longer.  And  this  text,  to  him  who  speaks  it,  is 
the  truth  as  he  speaks  it ;  but,  to  those  who  hear  it,  does  not 
express  the  truth.  He  knows  it  does  not,  and  he  does 
not  mean  it  shall.  Only  after-ages,  from  other  sources,  will 
discover  the  truth  which  is  just  prefigured. 

I  am  not  satisfied  by  either  of  these  developments  of  doc- 
trine. I  think  the  Rationalist  statement  does  Jesus  gross 
injustice ;  and  I  think  the  Romanist  statement,  and  both  the 
Orthodox  statements,  more  gross  and  more  unjust,  even  in 
their  efibrt  to  exalt  him.  To  say  that  he,  knowing  he  was 
very  God,  the  living  God,  the  Almighty,  the  Jehovah,  who 
had  made,  and  was  now  sustaining,  this  world  on  which  they 
trod ;  whom  these  apostles  had  been  worshipping  since  they 
were  children  ;  that  he  should,  with  any  motive,  or  in 
whatever  sense,  have  permitted  them  to  say  that  he  was 
simply  anointed  by  that  God,  and  that  he  was  his  Son,  know- 
ing that,  at  that  moment,  they  did  not  understand  the  words 
as  he  did,  —  to  say  this,  appears  to  me  injury  as  gross  (though 
I  know  it  is  not  meant  as  insult)  as  ever  was  devised  by 
infidelity,  or  ever  attained  by  the  poor  pride  of  reason. 

And  the  other  view  —  that  here  is  all  an  acted  picture, 
an  external  representation ;  the  theory  which  has  to  bor- 
row even  its  language  from  the  theatre,  from  what  is  false 
and  is  meant  to  be  false ;  all  this  about  the  Son  represent- 
ing something  which,  in  any  distinct  sense,  he  was  not ;  of 
his  appearing  to  be  tempted,  while,  in  any  distinct  sense,  he 
was  not  tempted ;  of  his  living  and  moving  in  the  character 
of  the  Son  of  God,  while  really  and  truly  he  was  God  him- 
self; all  this  language  about  the  altar  form,  of  which  in  late 


17 


years  we  have  heard  much  experiment  —  is  simply  disgust- 
ing to  those  not  trained  to  it.  I  wish  any  protest  might  be 
heard,  in  the  right  quarters,  against  the  violence  it  does  to 
the  sentiment  of  Christendom,  if  not  to  its  convictions.  I 
wish  those  who  use  it  had  any  idea  of  the  quiver  of  sorrow,  if 
not  of  indignation,  with  which  those,  who  have  been  frankly 
making  their  Saviour  a  living  example  and  a  constant  friend, 
find  him  spoken  of  as  personifying  a  character  which  did  not 
naturally  belong  to  him,  and  keeping  up  reserve  and  con- 
cealment, which  only  our  keenness  has  been  enough  to  pene- 
trate. This  view  does  not  satisfy  me  :  it  pains  me  more  than 
any. 

Thus  do  I  set  aside  three  of  the  theories  of  development. 
And  yet  I  also  believe  in  the  constant  development  of  Chris- 
tian doctrine;  and  I  acknowledge  most  gratefully,  that  the 
chiurch  has  made  a  great  step  indeed,  if,  with  whatever 
errors,  all  its  leaders  are  agreed,  that,  from  century  to  cen- 
tmy,  the  world  will  know  more  of  Christianity,  rather  than 
less.  If  only  it  can  come  to  believe  that  that  development  is 
intrusted  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  wherever  he  acts,  and  not  simply 
to  his  whisper  to  early  councils  or  modem  popes,*  all  will  yet 
be  well.  It  is  a  great  advance  on  the  letter-worship  of  old 
years,  if  we  see  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  around  us,  and  will 
guide  us  into  all  tioith.  The  books  of  the  New  Testament 
are  now  the  earliest  monuments  of  the  Divine  Life,  as  the 
Son  of  God  gave  it  to  mankind.  In  those  books,  we  have  all 
our  knowledge  of  what  he  did  and  what  he  said ;  we  see  all 
the  picture  of  the  work  he  wrought  on  Peter  and  John  and 
Caiaphas  and  Judas  :  but  it  does  not  follow  that  we  are  only 
to  try  to  reproduce  those  books,  simply  and  hterally,  in  the 
hfe  of  to-day.     We  are  not  to  try  to  make  ourselves  second 


*  It  is  to  be  observed,  that  no  "  council'^  was  called  in  1854  to  decide  the  defini- 
tion of  the  doctrine  regarding  Mary  mother,  but  only  an  assembly' of  prelates  known 
to  be  favorable  to  it, —  what  we  should  call  a  "packed  convention."  Roman- 
Catholic  writers  of  distinction  insist  that  Pope  Pius  did  not  dare  trust  the  "  defini- 
tion "  to  a  "  council,"  technically  so  called. 

3 


18 


Peters  or  second  Andrews.  We  are  not  necessarily  to  go 
about  on  foot,  two  and  two,  preaching  the  gospel,  because 
they  did.  We  are  not  necessarily  to  perform  vows  in  Jewish 
temples  because  Paul  did.  We  study  in  those  books  the 
impress  of  Christ  on  his  time,  that,  with  God's  present  gui- 
dance, we  may  fully  receive  his  impress  upon  our  time.  We 
do  not  ask  to  go  back  to  "  tread  where  he  trod ; "  we  do  not 
ask  to  sit,  and  mend  nets  by  the  Jjake  of  Galilee  :  but,  rather, 
that  in  treading  on  these  pavements,  and  in  building  this 
machinery  of  to-day,  the  Life  Divine  which  he  brought  into 
the  world  may  quicken  our  life-blood,  and  give  us  life  more 
abundantly. 

Between  that  work  of  Jesus  on  the  handful  of  fishermen 
around  him,  and  the  work  he  carries  on  this  day  on  the  hun- 
dreds of  millions  of  people,  in  whose  hearts,  more  or  less,  he 
is  reigning,  the  difference  is  wide  indeed.  His  promise  has 
been  fulfilled  most  graciously,  —  that  the  church  would  do 
greater  things  than  the  apostles  did.  The  Holy  Spirit, 
speaking  to  who  shall  say  how  many  hearts,  has  led  them 
into  truth,  wider,  wider,  and  wider;  and,  chief  among  its 
gracious  influences,  it  has  brought  to  their  remembrance  all 
things  that  he  did,  and  all  things  that  he  said  :  but  it  has 
not  proved,  that,  in  what  Christ  said,  he  held  back  any  thing ; 
that  what  he  said  was  insufficient  for  that  time  or  this  time. 

The  Holy  Spu-it  has  not  convicted  him  either  of  a  timid  or 
a  reserved  or  of  a  half-way  declaration.  All  doctrines  of 
development  fail  which  hint  that  it  has.  The  life  of  Christ, 
which  should  sweep  into  our  lives,  proves  to  be  fitted  to  the 
most  complicated  conditions  even  of  this  **  scientific  activity," 
of  which  our  theologians  boast,  to  those  of  enlarging  disco- 
very, of  intricate  society,  of  a  world  a  million  times  larger 
than  the  world  of  Galilee.  Just  so  it  will  prove  fitted  to  all 
the  relations  of  our  lives  in  worlds  on  worlds  beyond,  when 
we  walk  through  infinity,  and  enter,  in  God's  pleasure,  into 
the  duties  and  the  life  of  the  archangels  round  his  throne. 
As  we  grow  to  see  this,  as  we  grow  to  feel  it,  our  idea  of 


19 


its  grandeur  develops  more  and  more :  but  when  we  come 
back  to  see  what  he  said  of  his  life ;  when  we  sit  at  his  feet, 
or  listen  to  those  sitting  there,  we  find  that  the  statement  he 
made  then  and  there  to  the  fishermen,  as  they  sat  upon  the 
beach,  is  the  statement  he  will  make  to  the  host  of  heaven 
when  they  are  all  gathered  together  in  the  courts  of  the 
Almighty.  In  the  triumph  of  his  kingdom,  as  in  the  humi- 
lity of  his  cross,  he  will  never  think  of  the  robbery  of  equal- 
ing God :  but  always  there  as  here,  in  heaven  as  in  Nazareth, 
his  word  will  be  as  it  has  been,  —  that  it  pleased  the  Al- 
mighty to  anoint  him  ;  that  he  is  the  Anointed  of  God.  He 
is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  who  discloses  God 
to  all  his  children. 

It  is  a  victory,  I  confess,  that  the  church  has  advanced 
beyond  that  stupid  literaHsm  which  made  an  idol  of  the  Bible, 
and  which,  if  legitimately  carried  out,  would  make  us  rub  our 
com  between  our  hands  for  bread,  because  the  apostles  did ; 
and  look  for  a  destruction,  Hke  Sodom's,  of  the  kingdoms 
of  the  world,  because  they  so  interpreted  Jesus'  prophecy. 
Taking  those  records  of  what  he  said,  let  us,  with  the  free- 
dom which  he  gave  us,  under  the  guidance  of  this  present 
God,  —  as  near  us  as  he  was  to  them,  —  work  out  the  great 
life-problems  of  our  duty  in  our  day.  But  we  must  suppose 
that  he  gave  us  the  foundation  to  build  upon.  We  must 
grant  him  the  right  of  stating  what  that  foundation  is.  We 
must  take  the  statement  of  the  foundation  from  him  alone. 

It  is  true  that  we  are  open  to  every  temptation.  So  some 
demon  of  curiosity  may  tempt  us  to  define  what  is  inde- 
finable. True,  I  cannot  tell  how  God  acts  in  my  own  heart, 
though  I  know  he  acts  here  ;  true,  I  cannot  tell  how  my 
soul  rules  my  thinking  powers,  though  I  know  it  does  rule 
them  :  still  some  spirit  of  evil  may  tempt  me  to  undertake 
to  tell  how  God  acted  in  the  heart  of  Jesus,  and  how  in  him 
his  divine  soul  was  united  with  human  intelligence. 

"  So  fools  rush  in  where  angels  fear  to  tread." 


20 


It  is  human,  I  suppose,  to  make  such  inquiry.  Well,  then,  if 
I  embark  on  it,  let  me  do  it  with  one  proviso.  What  he  said 
about  himself  must  be  sufficient  for  me  ;  what  he  told,  I  must 
receive  as  the  whole ;  what  he  explained,  I  must  take  as  the 
full  explanation.  To  do  else  is  to  insult  him.  To  let  any 
created  man  or  any  body  of  men  sit  in  judgment  on  his  nature 
afterwards,  to  add  to  his  words  that  which  he  did  not  choose 
to  add  to  them,  is  to  do  dishonor  to  his  simphcity ;  nay,  even 
to  his  truth. 

In  this  inquiry  as  to  what  he  was,  if  we  are  forced  to  it,  we, 
who  do  not  know  what  we  are,  —  we  will  listen  to  him,  and 
to  him  alone.  In  that  inquiry,  we  will,  perhaps,  some  other 
day,  go  farther.  To-day,  we  will  remember  that  this  is  his 
central  word  at  the  crisis-moment.  The  foundation  of  his 
church  is  this,  —  that  he  is  the  Christ,  the  Anointed ;  the  Son 
of  the  hving  God. 


II. 


"  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus 
Christ."  —  1  Cor.  iii.  11. 

Paul  is  speaking,  in  these  words,  of  the  building-up  of  the 
Christian  Church.  He  has  been  speaking  of  his  own  work 
in  it.  He  says  he  can  do  nothing  but  build  upon  the  foun- 
dation. Here  he  uses  the  same  figure  which  Jesus  used  to 
Peter,  when,  in  reply  to  his  cry,  "  Thou  art  the  Chi'ist,  the 
Son  of  the  living  God,"  he  said,  "  On  this  rock  I  will  build 
my  church." 

I  do  not  propose  now  to  go  any  farther  than  this  statement 
of  Jesus  in  inquiring  what  he  considered  himself  or  called 
himself.  He  said  this  was  the  foundation  of  his  church. 
Let  it  be  so.  In  the  fact,  however,  that  there  is  a  founda- 
tion, it  is  implied  that  something  will  be  built  upon  the 
foundation.  Jesus  himself  seems,  thus  far,  to  grant  that 
his  followers  have  some  rights  in  "  developing  the  doctrine  " 
which  they  receive  from  him.  They  are  to  build,  undoubt- 
edly, on  him  as  a  foundation.  Paul,  in  this  passage,  speaks  of 
his  work  in  such  building.  I  propose,  then,  now  to  examine 
what  Jesus  says,  not  in  describing  the  foundation,  but  in 
describing  the  work  of  his  disciples  upon  it.  We  will  come 
to  him  to  learn  what  was  his  idea  of  true  discipleship  He 
did  propose  that  the  disciples  should  build.  Did  lio  propose 
that  they  should  *'  develop  "  the  foundation  into  any  thing 
more  than  he  gave  them  ?  After  examining  thus  his  defini- 
tions of  discipleship,  we  will  in  the  same  manner  examine 
those  definitions  of  discipleship  left  us  by  his  immediate  fol- 
lowers.    We  shall  thus  find  out  from  the  original  sources 


22 


what  were  the  first  definitions  of  Christian  work  in  building 
on  the  foundation  of  our  faith.  Thus  we  shall  find  out 
what  are  our  rights  and  powers  as  builders ;  how  much 
can  we  do  in  building  on  the  rock  ?  in  what  direction  can 
we  develop  doctrine  which  has  been  hidden?  and  when 
can  we  bring  out  views  which  Jesus  thought  "  wisest  to 
reserve  "  ? 

Now,  it  happens,  that,  just  as  we  often  have  to  sum  up  in 
brief  our  religious  position,  as  we  want  to  now,  just  so  Jesus 
often  had  occasion  to  do.  As  we  go  on,  we  shall  see,  I 
think,  that,  in  such  summings-up,  we  are  to  look  for  the 
spirit,  and  not  be  tied  by  the  letter.  One  man  writes  a 
creed  so  that  it  tells  how  he  himself  comes  to  God;  but 
life  is  lost,  you  see,  when  that  creed  is  imposed  on  another 
who  did  not  come  in  precisely  the  same  way.  In  such  mat- 
ters, if  there  be  the  least  divergence,  the  creed  does  not  fit 
at  all.  In  the  mould  in  which  a  bust  of  Venus  was  cast,  you 
can  no  more  shut  up  a  bust  of  Clytie  than  you  could  a  bust 
of  Hercules.  Still  we  find,  even  in  our  own  daily  lives,  that 
there  is  constant  need  for  condensed  explanations  of  religion, 
which  can  be  used  in  familiar  language,  in  answer  to  eager 
or  even  captious  inquiry.  Such  short  abridgments  do  not 
profess  to  exhaust  religious  teaching;  but  they  do  set  forth 
the  essentials  around  which  the  rest  shall  cluster.  Jesus,  in 
his  life,  found  just  that  necessity.  I  propose,  then,  this 
morning,  in  our  examination  of  what  constitutes  Christian 
discipleship,  to  examine  all  those  condensed  definitions  of 
it  which  Jesus  himself  gave.  I  propose,  next  Sunday,  to 
examine  those  given  by  his  apostles.  I  do  not  call  Jesus' 
own  definitions  the  creed  which  he  proposed,  because  he 
never  proposed  any ;  but  I  do  say,  they  are  the  forms,  which, 
if  any  creed  is  to  be  taken  from  his  words,  must  be  chosen. 
They  are  Jesus  Christ's  definitions  of  discipleship.  They 
must  be  taken  as  the  bases  of  any  expressed  creed,  if  my 
position  is  correct,  —  that  what  Christ  explained  as  to  his 
own  person  is  the  full  explanation. 


23 


I  shall  first  quote  in  order  all  these  gospel  definitions,  and 
at  length.  You  must  not  say  that  they  are  tedious ;  for  I 
am  going  to  argue  from  them  afterward.  I  do  not,  there- 
fore, choose  to  abridge  them,  nor  to  ask  you  to  take  their 
general  sense  on  my  authority ;  and  therefore  I  prefer  to 
bring  all  of  them  forward  at  length  and  together.  I  quote 
them  in  order  of  time,  and  not  in  the  order  in  which  the 
books  happen  to  be  found  together. 

Early  in  Jesus'  ministry,  he  says  to  Nicodemus,  "  Except  a 
man  be  born  again,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God."  He 
repeats  the  same  statement  afterwards  in  GaUlee  :  "  Whoso- 
ever shall  not  receive  the  kingdom  of  God  as  a  little  child 
shall  not  enter  therein."  To  Nicodemus,  once  more  :  "  Ex- 
cept a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter 
the  kingdom  of  God."  And  yet  again  :  "  God  so  loved  the 
world,  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,  that  whosoever 
believeth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  Hfe." 
Here,  in  passing,  we  observe  that  John  Baptist  says,  a  few 
days  after,  "  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting 
life."  As  Jesus  leaves  Jerusalem  and  returns  to  Galilee,  he 
meets  the  woman  of  Samaria;  to  whom  he  says,  "The  true 
worshippers  shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth." 
On  his  next  visit  to  Jerusalem,  "  He  that  heareth  my  word, 
and  believeth  on  Him  that  sent  mc,  hath  everlasting  Hfe ; "  and 
on  his  third,  "  I  am  the  light  of  the  world  :  he  that  followeth 
me  shall  not  walk  in  darkness,  but  shall  have  the  light  of 
life."  And  again :  "  I  am  the  door :  by  me  if  any  man 
enter  in,  he  shall  be  saved,  and  shall  go  in  and  out,  and  find 
pasture."  Immediately  after  this,  he  returns  to  Galilee ;  be- 
gins his  public  preaching  among  his  own  countrymen ;  where 
the  first  "  foundation  text "  is,  "  Love  your  enemies,  bless  them 
that  curse  you,  do  good  to  them  that  hate  you,  and  pray  for 
them  which  despitefuUy  use  you  and  persecute  you ;  that  you 
may  be  the  children  of  your  Father  who  is  in  heaven."  He 
sends  out  his  apostles  soon  after,  and  gives  them  this  direc- 
tion :  **  Preach,  saying.  The  kingdom  of  Heaven  is  at  hand." 


24 


He  sends  out  the  Seventy,  and  directs  them  to  say,  "The 
kingdom  of  God  is  come  nigh  unto  you : "  and  immediately 
after,  to  the  lawyer  who  asked,  "  What  shall  I  do  to  inherit 
eternal  life  ? "  he  said,  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy 
strength ;  and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself."  To  the  Jews  at  the 
Feast  of  Dedication :  *'  My  sheep  hear  my  voice,  and  I  know 
them,  and  they  follow  me  :  and  I  give  unto  them  eternal  life  ; 
and  they  shall  never  perish,  neither  shall  any  pluck  them 
out  of  my  hand."  In  the  same  tenor  to  Martha,  about  this 
time :  "  I  am  the  Resurrection  and  the  Life.  He  that 
believeth  in  me,  though  he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he  live." 
In  Galilee  again :  "  Whosoever  shall  do  the  will  of  my 
Father  who  is  in  heaven,  the  same  is  my  brother  and  sister 
and  mother."  To  the  Jews  in  Capernaum :  "  I  am  the  Bread 
of  life  :  he  that  cometh  to  me  shall  never  hunger,  and  he 
that  believeth  on  me  shall  never  thirst."  And  '*  This  is  the 
will  of  Him  that  sent  me,  that  every  one  which  seeth  the  Son, 
and  believeth  on  him,  may  have  everlasting  life."  And 
"  Whoso  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood  hath  eternal 
life,  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day."  And  "  He 
that  eateth  me,  even  he  shall  live  by  me."  The  end  of  his 
life  is  now  approaching,  and  he  speaks  of  his  church  dis- 
tinctly now  for  the  first  time  :  it  is  to  be  built  on  this  rock ; 
that  he  "  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God."  Then 
the  "  following  him "  is  explained  thus :  "  If  any  man  will 
come  after  me,  let  him  deny  himself,  and  take  up  his  cross 
daily,  and  follow  me :  whosoever  will  lose  his  life  for  my  sake 
shall  find  it."  And  in  the  same  tone,  to  the  young  noble- 
man :  "  If  thou  wilt  be  perfect,"  or  "  If  thou  ^vilt  inherit  eter- 
nal life,  sell  all  that  thou  hast,  and  come  and  follow  me." 
And  in  the  same  conversation  :  "  Every  one  that  hath  forsaken 
houses  or  brethren  or  sisters  or  father  or  mother  or  wife 
or  children  or  lands  for  my  name's  sake  shall  receive  a 
hundred-fold,  and  shall  inherit  everlasting  life."  This  is 
said  when  he  is  on  his  way,  for  the  fifth  and  last  time,  to 


25 


Jerusalem.  He  addresses  at  Jerusalem,  in  the  last  week  of 
his  life,  to  the  Twelve,  the  parable  of  the  sheep  and  the  goats ; 
in  which  is  this  statement :  "  Then  shall  the  King  say  unto 
them  on  his  right  hand,  Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  in- 
herit the  kingdom  prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of 
the  world.  For  I  was  an  hungred,  and  ye  gave  me  meat ;  I 
was  thirsty,  and  ye  gave  me  drink ;  I  was  a  stranger,  and  ye 
took  me  in ;  naked,  and  ye  clothed  me ;  I  was  sick,  and 
ye  visited  me ;  I  was  in  prison,  and  ye  came  xmto  me."  In 
parting  from  the  Twelve  the  next  night :  "  A  new  command- 
ment I  give  unto  you,  that  ye  love  one  another ;  as  I  have 
loved  you,  that  ye  also  love  one  another.  By  this  shall  all 
men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples,  if  ye  have  love  one  to 
another."  —  "1  am  the  Way  and  the  Truth  and  the  Life : 
no  man  cometh  unto  the  Father  but  by  me."  And  in  the 
prayer  of  the  Last  Supper :  "  And  this  is  life  eternal,  that 
they  might  know  thee  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ, 
whom  thou  hast  sent."  Defending  himself  the  next  morning 
before  Pilate,  he  says,  "  Every  one  that  is  of  the  truth  heareth 
my  voice."  After  his  resurrection,  he  says  to  the  Eleven, 
*'  Peace  be  unto  you :  as  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  so  have  I 
sent  you."  And  at  the  very  last :  "  Go  ye  into  all  nations, 
baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things 
whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you." 

These  are  the  texts  —  and,  I  think,  all  the  texts — in  which 
Jesus  gives  his  definitions  of  Christian  discipleship.  So  far  as 
we  take  him  as  our  authority  in  the  definition  of  Christianity, 
we  are  to  include  these  words  in  our  definitions.  Of  course, 
the  glad  tidings  he  brought  were  vastly  more  extensive  than 
these  texts,  and  comprise  many  more  directions ;  but  so  far 
as  he  gives  any  description  of  what  one  of  his  followers  is  or 
what  he  is  not,  —  any  test  of  discipleship,  he  gives  it  in  these 
texts.  If  we  may  use  the  words,  in  these  is  his  body  of  divi- 
nity. So  far  as  he  helps  us  to  condense,  abridge,  or  digest 
his  gospel,  to  put  it  in  statement  brief  enough  to  repeat  and 

4 


26 


remember,  he  does  it  in  the  thirty  texts  which  I  have  quoted. 
I  certainly  do  not  say,  that  we  have  no  right  to  digest  or 
develop  his  system  from  other  texts;  but  I  do  say,  that,  if 
we  look  for  his  definition  or  his  statement  of  his  system,  we 
find  it  here.  From  other  reading,  we  can  make  our  statement 
as  to  his  church ;  but  it  is  in  these  words  that  we  have  his. 

In  about  half  of  these  texts,  he  defines  discipleship.  In 
about  as  many  (taking  it  for  granted  that  it  is  understood 
what  a  disciple  of  his  is),  he  tells  what  his  disciples  will 
gain.  Of  the  first  half,  it  is  certain  that  these  texts  do  not 
help  those  writers  who  would  construct  the  church  by  com- 
pelHng  its  members  to  assent  to  particular  theories  of  human 
nature  or  the  divine  nature.  The  majority  of  theologians  do 
this.  In  defining  a  Christian,  they  say  that  he  is  one  who 
has  such  or  such  intellectual  convictions.  You  see,  as  I  read 
these  texts,  how  little  support  that  definition  has  in  the  letter 
or  in  the  spirit  of  Christ's  definitions.  Jesus  does  not  mean 
to  create  a  new  philosophical  party,  arriving  at  one  set  of 
opinions  on  certain  important  subjects.  He  does  not  come  to 
give  us  opinions  merely :  he  comes  to  give  the  Life  which  is 
beneath  all  opinions,  because  it  is  beneath  every  thing  with 
which  man  has  to  do.  He  comes  to  give  us  new  Life.  It  is 
life  which  is  to  make  us  walk  better,  nm  better,  sleep  better, 
eat  better,  and  drink  better;  the  life  which  is  to  make  us 
work  better,  rest  better,  play  and  enjoy  better;  the  life  which 
is  to  make  us  teach  better,  learn  better,  —  sail,  row,  cut,  carve, 
plough,  plant,  reap,  and,  in  general,  subdue  the  world,  better ; 
the  life  which  is  to  make  us  hope  better,  believe  better,  and 
love  better;  the  life  which  is  to  make  us  look  backward 
better,  and  look  forward  better ;  the  hfe,  best  of  all,  which  is 
to  make  us  endure  better,  possess  our  souls  in  patience  better, 
forgive  better,  and  pray  better ;  the  life  in  which  we  are  to 
see  a  living  God  better,  and  to  come  to  him  nearer.  In  this 
enlarged  life,  this  life  on  the  plan  of  Heaven,  this  life  which 
begins  an  angel's  life,  of  course  we  shall  know  better  and 
think  better. 


27 


But  it  is  a  very  narrow  statement  of  that  life  to  say  that  it 
consists  only  in  thinking  better  and  knowing  better.  Nar- 
rower yet  is  the  statement  which  puts  it  all  in  the  knowledge 
of  God's  nature  and  our  own.  Knowledge  is  something ;  but 
it  is  not  every  thing ;  and  human  knowledge,  the  knowledge 
man  can  grasp  of  God  and  his  designs,  is  a  very  small  part  of 
every  thing.  And  so  it  happens,  that  when,  as  on  all  these 
different  occasions,  the  Lord  of  Life  explains  what  he  gives  to 
his  followers,  and  what  they  are  to  try  to  gain,  he  does  not 
once  allude  to  the  knowledge  which  they  are  to  acquire,  to 
the  convictions  which  they  are  to  form.  He  does  not  give, 
in  his  own  words,  the  first  phrase  of  a  scientific  theology. 
No  :  he  came  to  enliven  the  world,  to  save  it  from  sin,  to 
bring  it  to  God.  He  left  the  world,  expecting  and  demand- 
ing that  his  followers  should  take  up  this  work,  and  carry 
it  through.  He  gave  them  Life :  he  expected  them  to  give 
it  to  others.  Demanding  this,  and  nothing  less,  he  looked 
forward  to  his  church  ;  but  it  was  not  to  a  company  of  men 
and  women  at  work  with  dictionaries  and  commonplace 
books,  finding  out  about  "  deific  energies  "  and  "  instrumental 
inequality,"  and  "  speculative  cognition  of  infinite  person- 
ality," and  the  rest.  He  looked  rather  to  a  close-knit  com- 
pany of  brethren  and  sisters,  knit  so  close  that  he  could  call  it 
a  family  or  a  brotherhood,  eager  that  God's  kingdom  should 
come.  He  had  revealed  God  as  the  Father  of  them  all.  He 
himself  loved  them  all,  so  that  he  was  willing  to  die  for  them 
all ;  and  he  looked  forward,  nor  vainly  as  it  has  proved,  to 
like  love  of  him.  Then  he  said,  when  he  spoke  of  his 
church,  that  this  love  of  him  would  bind  together  the  mem- 
bers of  that  church  in  love  ;  and,  in  describing  the  united 
family  of  the  children  of  God  thus  united  in  a  love  which 
sprang  from  a  love  of  him,  he  gave  the  one  sign  of  disciple- 
ship  which  he  ever  did  give,  the  only  sign  and  the  only  test 
of  it :  "  By  this  shall  all  men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples, 
if  ye  have  love  one  to  another."  —  "As  I  have  loved  you, 
that  ye  also  love  one  another." 


28 


As  you  obserred,  there  are  four  or  five  other  texts  which 
dwell  on  the  love  the  disciples  are  to  have  for  each  other ; 
and,  as  we  saw,  he  speaks  of  this  union  between  the  disciples 
as  to  be  as  close  as  the  union  between  himself  and  God. 
Whatever  that  union  is,  such  is  to  be  our  union.  We  are  to 
be  one,  even  as  Christ  and  God  are  one. 

He  did  not  expect  that  this  union  would  come  merely  be- 
cause he  asked  for  it.  He  knew  it  would  never  come  unless 
men  followed  him ;  and  they  could  not  follow  him  unless  they 
believed  in  him.  Of  these  thirty  texts,  therefore,  at  least  ten 
speak  of  the  disciples  as  following  him  and  believing  in  him. 
It  is  clear  enough  what  following  him  means,  though  the 
church  has  not  been  very  successful  in  doing  it.  But  what  is 
it  to  believe  in  him  ?  I  know  the  words  are  indistinct :  so, 
after  all,  are  most  words.  Still,  if  we  cannot  accurately 
define  to  others  all  his  intent  in  them,  I  think  we  can  really 
get  at  it  for  ourselves  if  we  really  choose.  To  believe  in 
him  completely  implies  that  complete  confidence  in  him,  that 
we  are  willing  to  follow  him,  or  to  make  him  our  Leader. 
"  Ye  call  me  Master  and  Lord :  and  ye  say  well ;  for  so  I 
am  :  "  and  that  is  the  test  which  he  proposes.  "  Whoever 
wishes  to  come  after  me  must  take  up  his  cross,  and  follow 
me."  If  I  believe  in  him  enough  for  that,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  I  believe  as  he  asked  me  to. 

But  it  is  one  thing  to  believe  in  him,  and  another  to  believe 
or  receive  any  special  explanation  of  his  nature.  Look  at 
little  things  in  illustration.  I  believe  in  the  power  of  elec- 
tricity so  completely,  that  I  implicitly  trust  my  life  on  a 
message  sent  over  the  wire ;  but  it  does  not  follow  that  I  can 
say  what  electricity  is,  how  it  works,  why  or  where  it  works. 
On  the  other  hand,  while  I  believe  in  electricity,  I  may  be- 
lieve (as,  in  fact,  I  do  believe)  that  every  man's  theory  about 
electricity  is  untrue.  Or  I  may  believe  in  the  expansive 
power  of  steam ;  so  that,  when  I  mean  to  go  to  Worcester,  I 
simply  try  to  connect  myself  with  a  steam-engine  which  is 
going  there.    I  have  only  to  follow  where  it  takes  me.    But  I 


29 


do  not  have  to  believe  any  theory  of  the  steam-engine.  It  is 
not  necessary  that  I  should  have  any,  even  the  faintest,  idea 
how  God  gives  to  steam  the  marvellous  qualities  that  it  has. 
Take  these  as  the  humblest  parables  —  like  flour  and  leaven 
parables  —  of  the  way  in  which  I  am  to  follow  Christ  or  be- 
lieve in  Christ,  and  in  which  he  meant  I  should  follow  him. 
I  can  follow  him,  sure  that  he  is  my  divine  Leader ;  but  I 
need  not  say,  how  God  gives  him  his  Spirit.  I  can  believe  in 
him  without  believing  in  any  man's  "  scientific  development " 
of  his  nature. 

Thus  is  it  that  Jesus,  constantly  calling  on  men  to  follow 
him,  speaks  three  times  in  these  thirty  texts  of  their  believing 
in  him.  The  truth  is,  that,  when  the  following  him  visibly  and 
constantly  required  that  a  man  take  his  cross  upon  his  shoul- 
ders, it  was  very  certain,  that,  if  a  man  followed  him,  he  did 
believe  in  him.  Through  the  Gospels,  therefore,  the  test  of 
a  belief  in  Christ  is  the  following  Christ.  If  we  make  him 
our  Leader  really,  if  we  follow  our  Leader  as  we  live,  then 
we  beheve  in  him.  If  we  fail  to  follow  him^  it  is  very  certain 
that  we  do  not  really  beheve. 

Such  is  the  drift  of  the  fourteen  or  fifteen  texts  which  I 
spoke  of  as  specially  defining  discipleship.  The  rest  of  the 
thirty  texts  of  definition  speak  as  if  there  were  no  question  as 
to  what  a  disciple  is,  but  simply  define  specifically  what  a 
disciple  is  to  gain.  We  are  now  to  look  at  them  with  the 
others.  Of  all  the  thirty,  we  are  now  to  see  what  are 
the  promises  which  Jesus  makes  for  those  who  follow  him. 
Once  his  followers  are  said  to  be  saved ;  once,  to  be  children 
of  his  Father;  once,  to  love  God;  once,  to  do  the  will  of 
God ;  once,  to  worship  the  Father ;  once,  to  "  believe  on  Him 
that  sent  me ; "  twice  they  are  said  to  be  near  God ;  twice,  to 
come  to  the  Father ;  twice,  to  know  Christ  as  the  Son  of  the 
living  God ;  twice,  to  be  of  the  truth.  Besides  these  separate 
declarations,  and,  in  their  great  declaration,  including  each  of 
these,  half  of  these  texts  of  definition  (as  I  have  called  them) 


30 


say  that  the  followers  of  Christ  shall  receive  life,  —  shall  re- 
ceive eternal  life,  shall  receive  everlasting  life,  or  shall  receive 
life  more  abundantly.  Here,  as  we  saw,  was  the  central  ob- 
ject of  his  mission,  —  that  men  who  were  dead  might  be  alive 
again ;  that  they  might  begin  to  live.  His  cures  of  the  sick  are 
so  many  types  of  this  great  cure  of  a  dying  world.  Its  ears  are 
unstopped,  and  the  scales  fall  from  its  eyes.  The  forward 
march  of  the  lame  is  another :  the  world  puts  its  foot  to  the 
ground,  and  from  the  halt  of  centuries  it  presses  on.  The  son 
of  the  widow  of  Nain  opens  his  eyes ;  the  daughter  of  Jairus 
looks  up  from  her  death-bed,  and  smiles  upon  her  mother ; 
Lazarus  comes  forth,  and  they  unbind  his  graveclothes ;  and 
Jesus  himself,  at  the  break  of  day,  pushes  away  the  stone 
from  the  mouth  of  the  tomb.  Little  are  even  these  miracles 
compared  with  the  constant  miracle  which  they  illustrate,  in 
which,  for  century  after  century,  the  young  men  and  maidens 
of  the  world,  who  have  been  dead,  wake,  and  are  alive  again ; 
the  world's  graveqlothes  are  flung  by ;  its  old  sepulchres  are 
thrown  open  :  for,  at  his  sovereign  word,  it  follows  and  it 
lives. 

But,  if  it  does  not  follow,  it  does  not  live.  These  texts 
of  definition  give  no  cover  to  those  who  are  ready  to  believe, 
but  are  not  ready  to  follow.  These  texts  say  nothing  about 
exalting  Jesus ;  they  say  nothing  about  honoring  him,  either 
in  definition  of  his  nature  or  in  worship  of  his  person.  The 
church,  alas !  has  longed  to  make  them  do  so.  So  easy  a 
thing  would  it  be,  were  that  enough  for  us,  to  exalt  him  in 
our  ritual.  Oh  !  yes  :  we  could  all  do  that.  The  church  has 
been  wilHng  to  borrow  every  name  for  his  exaltation,  to  seat 
him  even  on  the  throne  of  heaven,  if  only  it  might  buy  off 
the  inexorable  condition.  But  no  :  he  says  nothing  about 
sitting  on  the  throne  of  heaven,  nothing  about  our  defining  his 
nature,  nothing  about  our  worshipping  him  ;  but  he  does  insist 
that  we  follow  him.  A  luxurious  church  has  hoped  to  escape 
by  painting  him  pictures  and  building  him  temples  ;  a  philoso- 
phical church  has  hoped  to  escape  by  analyzing  his  attributes. 


31 


and  explaining  for  him  his  genealogy;  a  mystical  church, 
by  veihng  him  in  cloud,  and  making  him  suffer  where  we 
ought  to  suffer ;  and  a  commonplace  church  has  coolly  offered 
to  substitute  intellectual  adherence  to  a  metaphysical  creed 
for  the  fulfilment  of  his  inexorable  demand.  But  neither 
the  indolent,  the  philosophical,  the  mystical,  nor  the  intel- 
lectual, have  bought  by  their  substitutes  the  Life  which  he 
promised.  He  offered  himself  as  our  Master,  and  left  us  his 
work  to  finish.  He  says  to  us,  "  If  you  obey  me,  you  will 
follow  me."  He  proved  his  affection  for  us  in  his  death; 
and  he  says,  "  If  you  believe  in  me,  you  will  love  me." 
He  meant  that  we  should  work  at  one  in  this  service ;  and 
he  says,  "  If  you  love  me,  you  will  love  one  another." 
His  true  followers  must  listen  to  these  demands.  They 
must  not  be  tempted  by  any  of  the  cheap  substitutions. 
They  must  not  be  diverted  to  any  of  the  side-issues  of  the 
dreamers.  They  must  tread  resolutely  in  his  footsteps. 
They  must  drink  eagerly  of  his  life.  They  must  take 
bravely  hold  of  the  work  he  gave  them  to  do.  If  they  mean 
really  to  go  after  him,  they  must  take  up  each  his  cross,  and 
follow. 


in. 


"  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus 
Christ.  Now,  if  any  man  build  upon  this  foundation  gold,  silver, 
precious  stones,  wood,  hay,  stubble,   every  man's  work  shall  be 

MADE  manifest:     FOR    THE    DAY    SHALL    DECLARE    IT,   BECAUSE    IT    SHALL 
BE  REVEALED     BY   FIRE;     AND    THE   FIRE    SHALL    TRY    EVERY    MAN'S  WORK 

OF  WHAT  SORT  IT  IS."  —  1  Cor.  Ui.  11-13. 


The  work  spoken  of  is  the  building-up  of  the  Christian 
Church.  Paul  has  said,  just  before,  that  he  claims  no  per- 
sonal authority  in  building  it  up.  He  is  nothing ;  but  he  has 
done  what  he  could.  What  he  has  done,  or  what  any  man 
has  done,  must  be  tested  by  time. 

The  passage,  therefore,  is  a  leading  passage  among  those 
which  show  what  the  apostles  thought  respecting  their  rights 
in  unfolding  or  developing  the  doctrine  of  Christ  and  the 
external  structure  of  his  church.  The  one  thing  certain  is 
always  the  foundation ;  viz.,  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the 
Christ.  On  that  foundation,  they  are  all  building  as  they 
can ;  hoping  to  bring  about  that  kingdom  for  which  they  are 
sent.  But,  as  they  build,  Paul  and  James  and  John  never 
claim  to  be  themselves  comer-stones,  as  the  modern  church 
claims  for  them.  They  never  claim  to  stand  in  the  place  of 
Christ :  still  less  do  they  claim  what  Romanists  and  Protes- 
tants together  claim  for  them,  —  to  unfold  fundamental  doc- 
trine which  Jesus  did  not  unfold,  or  which  he  has  reserved. 
They  take  the  tone,  rather,  of  the  most  humble  preachers  of 
our  day.  They  say,  "  We  teach  Christ  according  to  the  grace 
which  is  given  us.  If  we  teach  him  truly,  our  work  will 
stand;  for  he  does  not  change.  Where  we  are  wrong,  the 
harm  is  transient  j  for,  if  our  work  is  stubble,  it  will  be  de- 


33 


stroyed.     Only  the  foundation  is  sure.     The  foundation  is, 
that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God." 

I  am  now  to  prove  that  this  is  the  view  these  men  took  of 
their  position,  and  of  the  foundation  on  which  they  were 
building.  This  is  a  necessary  part  of  our  inquiry  into  the 
historical  question,  What  were  the  foundations  of  the  Christian 
religion  ?  It  is  necessary  also  in  our  other  inquiry.  What  are 
the  rights  of  the  church  in  developing  doctrine  concealed  or 
reserved  by  our  Master  ?  I  have  already  repeated  here  the 
texts  in  which  Jesus  himself  distinctly  defines  discipleship,  or 
gives  any  tests  of  discipleship.  With  the  same  conditions 
which  I  then  laid  down,  I  am  now  to  repeat  the  definitions  of 
Christianity  given  by  the  apostles  or  first  disciples.  As  I 
repeat  these  texts,  I  ask  you  to  observe  all  along  the  sensi- 
tiveness with  which  they  refrain  from  seeming  to  add  any 
thing  of  their  own  in  the  foundation.  They  all  build  upon  the 
foundation  :  "  But  other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that 
is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ." 

The  apostles'  definitions  of  Christianity  —  that  is  our  sub- 
ject. In  grouping  them  together,  I  acknowledge  that  the 
apostles  taught  a  great  deal  which  is  not  included  in  these 
definitions.  So  they  taught  a  great  deal  which  has  not  come 
to  us  at  all.  I  cannot,  then,  pretend  to  condense  all  they 
taught ;  but  here  are  their  specific  definitions  of  discipleship  : 
and  I  claim  that  they  must  have  laid  down  in  such  expres- 
sions all  they  thought  essential  or  fundamental ;  and  whoever 
wants  to  make  a  creed  or  formula  of  the  foundation  of  the 
church  must  make  it,  unless  he  reject  their  authority,  out  of 
these  early  definitions  of  theirs,  —  unless  he  is  satisfied  with 
those  of  Jesus  which  I  read  last  Sunday.  I  quote  from  the 
Acts  and  the  Epistles,  in  the  order  of  time,  just  as  I  did  from 
the  Gospels. 

Just  after  the  ascension,  at  the  day  of  the  great  Pentecost, 
Peter  says,  "  Whosoever  shall  call  on  the  name  of  Jehovah 
shall  be  saved ; "  quoting  the  Prophet  Joel,  and  saying  that 
that  time  had  come :  and  then,  when  they  were  pricked  in 

5 


34 


their  hearts,  and  asked,  "  What  shall  we  do  ? "  he  says, 
*'  Repent,  and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  yc  shall  receive 
the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  And,  the  same  day,  three  thou- 
sand were  added  to  the  disciples.  The  first  description  given 
of  the  church  is,  "  The  multitude  of  them  that  believed  were 
of  one  heart  and  of  one  soul."  The  Samaritans  were  bap- 
tized "  when  they  believed  Philip,  preaching  the  things  con- 
cerning the  kingdom  of  God  and  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ." 
Peter,  preaching  at  Ca^sarea,  sums  up  by  saying  that  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  was  slain  by  the  Jews.  "  God  has  raised  him  up,". . . 
"  and  commanded  us  to  testify  that  it  is  he  who  was  ordained 
of  God  to  be  the  Judge  of  quick  and  dead.  To  him  give  all 
the  prophets  witness,  that,  through  his  name,  whosoever  be- 
lieveth  in  him  shall  receive  remission  of  sins."  The  Holy 
Ghost  then  fell  on  all  who  heard  the  word.  Paul,  preaching 
in  Antioch,  sums  up  in  these  words,  after  saying  that  God 
has  raised  Jesus  from  the  dead :  "  Be  it  known  unto  you, 
therefore,  that  through  this  man  is  preached  unto  you  the 
forgiveness  of  sins ;  and,  by  him,  all  that  believe  are  justified 
from  all  things,  from  which  ye  could  not  be  justified  by  the 
law  of  Moses."  After  the  dissension  as  to  the  Gentile  con- 
verts, Peter  says  of  them,  "  God  bare  them  witness,  giving 
them  the  Holy  Ghost,  even  as  he  did  to  us  ;  "  and  his  argu- 
ment shows  that  he  regards  this  as  the  test  of  discipleship. 
On  his  second  journey,  Paul  was  in  prison  at  Philippi ;  and 
when  the  jailer  came  running  to  him,  and  asked  what  he 
must  do  to  be  saved,  Paul  said,  "  Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved."  At  Thessalonica,  the  Jews 
who  believed  had  been  taught  "  that  Christ  must  needs  have 
suffered,  and  risen  again  from  the  dead,  and  that  this  Jesus  is 
Christ ;  "  and'  the  Athenian  converts  believed  the  same  thing. 
Paul  writes  from  Corinth  two  letters  to  the  little  church  at 
Thessalonica ;  but  he  does  not  so  much  as  suggest  in  them 
any  test  of  discipleship,  or  any  definition  of  what  a  Christian 
is ;  nor  is  any  mentioned  in  the  history  of  eighteen  months 


35 


whicli  he  spent  at  Corintli.  But  at  Ephesus,  meeting  some 
of  John  Baptist's  followers,  he  explained  to  them  that  John 
meant  "  they  should  believe  on  him  who  came  after  him ;  " 
that  is,  on  Jesus.  When  they  heard  this,  they  were  baptized 
in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  In  a  letter  written  to  Corinth 
about  this  time,  our  text  comes  in  :  "  Other  foimdation  can  no 
man  lay  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ ;  "  and  this  : 
"  I  declare  unto  you  the  gospel  which  I  preached  unto  you, 
which  also  ye  have  received,  and  wherein  ye  stand;  by 
which  also  ye  are  saved,  unless  ye  have  believed  in  vain." 
This  gospel  is,  "  That  Christ  died  for  our  sins ;  and  that  he 
was  buried,  and  that  he  rose  again  the  third  day ; "  and  that 
he  was  seen  of  Cephas,  of  the  twelve,  of  five  hundred  bre- 
thren at  once,  of  James,  of  all  the  apostles,  and  of  Paul. 

Writing  to  the  Galatians,  Paul  thus  describes  their  church : 
*' Ye  are  all  the  children  of  God  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus ;  for 
as  many  of  you  as  have  been  baptized  into  Christ  have  put 
on  Christ,"  —  a  mystical  phrase,  explained  immediately  after- 
ward as  "  Ye  axe  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus."  Again  :  "  They 
that  are  Christ's  have  crucified  the  flesh  with  the  affections 
and  lusts."  — "  Bear  ye  one  another's  burdens,  and  so  fulfil 
the  law  of  Christ." 

To  the  church  at  Rome,  Paul  wrote  his  most  elaborate 
letter,  eager  to  remove  their  suspicions  that  he  was  a  radical 
disorganizer.  To  them  he  says,  "  God  has  set  Christ  Jesus 
forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in  his  blood,  to 
declare  God's  righteousness ;  that  God  might  be  just,  and  the 
justifier  of  him  who  believeth  in  Jesus."  —  "  Therefore,  being 
justified  by  faith,  we  have  peace  with  God  through  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ."  And  "  so  many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into 
Jesus  Christ  were  baptized  into  his  death ;  that  like  as  Chi'ist 
was  raised  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father,  even  so 
we  should  walk  in  newness  of  life."  '*  If  any  man  have  not  the 
Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his."  In  his  speech  to  the  Jews 
at  Jerusalem,  Paul  said  he  was  baptized  himself;  "washing 
away  his  sins,  and  calling  on  Jesus'  name."    And  to  Agrippa, 


36 


summing  up  his  own  preaching :  "  I  continue  witnessing  that 
Christ  should  suffer,  and  that  he  should  be  the  first  that  should 
rise  from  the  dead,  and  should  show  light  unto  the  people 
and  to  the  Gentiles."  Near  the  end  of  his  life,  writing  from 
Rome  to  the  Ephesians,  Paul  says,  "  Ye  are  no  more  strangers 
and  foreigners,  but  fellow-citizens  with  the  saints,  and  of  the 
household  of  God ;  and  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  apos- 
tles and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner- 
stone." And  he  describes  the  object  of  the  church  and  its 
ministry  to  be,  that  "  we  all  come  in  the  unity  of  the  faith, 
and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God,  unto  a  perfect 
man,  —  unto  the  measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of 
Christ." 

To  the  Colossians,  there  is  this  charge :  "  If  ye  be  risen 
with  Christ,  seek  those  things  that  are  above,  where  Christ 
sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  God." 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  —  probably  not  written  by 
Paul  —  contains  no  single  passage,  in  its  magnificent  practical 
appeals,  which  can  properly  be  called  a  definition  of  Chris- 
tianity. Indeed,  the  di'ift  of  the  letter  is,  that  while  the  old 
covenant  had  ordinances  of  service,  under  the  new,  the  dis- 
ciple was  left  (to  the  greatest  liberty,  perhaps  to  absolute  per- 
sonal independence,  in  his  allegiance  to  the  Most  High. 

In  the  Epistle  of  James,  there  is  this  definition  :  "  Pure 
religion  and  undefiled,  before  God  and  the  Father,  is  this : 
To  visit  the  fatherless  and  widows  in  their  affhction,  and  to 
keep  himself  unspotted  from  the  world." 

Peter,  in  his  First  Epistle,  speaks  of  the  elect,  whom  he 
addresses  thus :  "  Not  having  seen  Jesus  Christ,  [yet]  ye  love 
him ;  believing  in  him,  though  now  ye  see  him  not,  ye  rejoice 
with  joy  unspeakable  and  full  of  glory ;  receiving  the  end  of 
your  faith,  even  the  salvation  of  youi-  souls."  In  his  Second 
Epistle,  he  describes  them  as  those  who  have  obtained  like 
precious  faith  with  us  through  the  righteousness  of  God  and 
our  Savioiu-  Jesus  Chi'ist."  Immediately  after,  he  says, 
"  Giving  all  diligence,  add  to  your  faith,  virtue ;  and  to  vir- 


37 


tue,  knowledge  ;  and  to  knowledge,  temperance  ;  and  to  tem- 
perance, patience  ;  and  to  patience,  brotherly  kindness ;  and 
to  brotherly  kindness,  charity.  ...  If  ye  do  these  things,  ye 
shall  never  fall.  So  an  entrance  shall  be  ministered  unto  you 
abundantly  into  the  everlasting  kingdom  of  our  Lord  and 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ." 

St.  John  says,  in  opening  his  First  Epistle,  "  This  is  the 
message  which  we  have  heard  of  him,  and  declare  unto  you,  — 
that  God  is  light,  and  in  him  is  no  darkness  at  all."  He 
afterwards  gives  us  this  definition  :  "  Hereby  we  do  know 
that  we  know  Jesus  Christ,  if  we  keep  his  commandments." 
And  "  hereby  know  we  that  we  are  in  him.  He  that  saith 
he  abideth  in  him  ought  himself  also  so  to  walk,  even  as  he 
walked."  Again :  *'  In  this  the  children  of  God  are  mani- 
fest. .  .  .  Whosoever  doeth  not  righteousness  is  not  of  God, 
neither  he  that  loveth  not  his  brother."  —  "Hereby  we  know 
that  he  abideth  in  us,  by  the  Spirit  which  he  hath  given  us ; " 
and  "  every  spirit  that  confesseth  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in 
the  flesh  is  of  God."  —  "  Whosoever  shall  confess  that  Jesus 
is  the  Son  of  God,  God  dwelleth  in  him,  and  he  in  God."  — 
"  Whosoever  believeth  that  Jesus  is  the  Chiist  is  born  of 
God."  —  "  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  life."  In  the  Second 
Epistle :  "  He  that  abideth  in  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  he  hath 
both  the  Father  and  the  Son."  And  in  the  Third  :  "  He  that 
doeth  good  is  of  God."  —  "  He  that  doeth  evil  hath  not  seen 
God." 

These  are,  I  think,  all  the  texts  which  can  be  spoken  of  as 
being  the  apostles'  definitions  of  Christianity.  I  have  ex- 
tended to  the  utmost,  as  in  the  last  two,  the  range  by  which 
I  have  admitted  texts  into  their  number. 

You  will  observe  in  them,  first,  how  much  more  discursive 
is  the  language  of  the  apostles,  how  much  less  pointed,  than 
those  vivid,  condensed  words  of  Christ  himself,  which  I 
brought  together  last  Sunday.  You  will  observe,  next,  the 
reason  of  the  difficulty  which  the  modems  find  in  constructing 
from  these  writings  what  they  call  a  **  scientific  theology." 


38 


This  reason  appears,  ^r«i,  in  the  modesty  with  which  the  apos- 
tles kept  back  their  own  notions.  "  Who,  then,  is  Paul  ? 
who  is  ApoUos?"  they  cried.  "We  are  only  the  officers, — 
the  servants  through  whom  ye  believed."  They  never 
dreamed  of  using  such  inspiration  as  they  had  in  "  deve- 
loping scientifically  "  doctrines  which  the  Lord  had  reserved. 
Their  simple  business  was  to  apply  in  practice  Christ's  life 
to  the  every-day  work  of  Corinth  or  of  Babylon  or  of  Rome. 
If  they  did  this  well,  their  work  would  stand ;  if  they  did 
it  ill,  it  would  not  stand.  It  proved  that  they  did  it  well. 
The  Foundation  was  sure. 

Second,  and  chiefly,  you  see  that  modem  theologians  fail 
to  get  "  a  scientific  development "  of  doctrine  from  the  words 
of  the  apostles  ;  because  what  we  call  doctrine,  in  oui*  modern 
sense,  was  then  so  very  small  part  of  the  Christian  system. 
It  never  occurred  even  to  Paul,  the  most  speculative  of  the 
apostles,  that  intellectual  doctrine  and  definition  —  "  scientific 
development,"  as  we  call  it  —  would  ever  receive  that  atten- 
tion which  the  church  has  given  it.  Paul  even  says  some 
very  sharp  things  in  ridicule  of  science  falsely  so  called.  In 
fact,  where  the  word  "  doctrine  "  comes  in,  it  almost  always 
alludes  to  moral  conduct;  and  the  very  idea  of  a  chiu'ch 
resting  on  concurrence  of  opinion  does  not  appear  in  the 
Epistles  more  than  it  does  in  the  words  of  Christ.  Of 
course,  such  a  church  is  conceivable :  it  is,  in  a  manner, 
possible.  You  may  found  an  association  on  agreement  of 
opinion,  just  as  you  may  found  it  on  similarity  of  occupation, 
as  an  artist's  club  is  founded ;  or  on  the  accident  of  birth,  as 
the  St.  Patrick's  Society  or  St.  Andrew's  Society  is  founded : 
but  there  is  not  a  particle  of  evidence,  either  in  Jesus'  defi- 
nitions of  Christianity  or  in  his  apostles',  that  they  were 
founding  Christianity  on  any  such  concurrence  of  opinion. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  is  clear  that  they  had  a  very  different 
organization,  if  I  may  call  it  so,  in  view. 

"  If  I  may  call  it  so."  But  I  am  afraid  that  that  name 
organization  veils  the  great  idea.     The  idea  is,  that,  by  por- 


39 


traying  to  all  men  and  women  in  this  world,  Jesus  our 
Saviour;  his  love  for  us,  his  work  for  us,  and  his  death; 
by  obeying  his  instructions,  by  receiving  his  spirit,  and  by 
living  his  life,  —  we  shall  touch  heart  after  heart,  and  make 
quicker  their  pulses ;  so  that,  with  a  hfe  completely  new, 
those  hearts  will  beat,  and  those  men  and  women  live. 
Then  the  idea  is,  that  those  who  are  thus  alive  will  look 
wildly  round  for  blind  eyes  that  they  can  open,  for  broken 
heai'ts  they  can  soothe,  for  dead  lives  they  can  awaken ; 
that  in  the  rapture  and  energy,  the  joy  yet  dissatisfaction,  of 
awakened  life,  they  will  look,  on  the  one  hand,  on  Him  who 
thus  touched  them  ;  and,  on  the  other,  at  the  world,  for 
whose  life  he  died.  It  is  supposed,  then,  that  as  one  after 
another  thus  look,  both  on  him  and  on  the  world,  in  every 
tribe,  in  every  nation,  —  as  Jews  and  Elamites,  Asiatics,  Ro- 
mans, and  AMcans,  —  men  and  women  who  do  not  know 
each  other's  names  or  language  or  ojnnions,  —  begin  to  live 
with  this  unselfish  ardor,  as  they  begin  to  go  and  come  with 
this  spirit  that  is  in  him,  —  a  new  bond  will  attract  them 
to  each  other.  Only  attract  is  too  mean  a  word :  bond  is 
only  too  hard  a  figure.  Love  is  the  only  expression  grand 
enough,  and  enough  tender ;  and  of  that,  alas  !  the  sound 
has  been  so  profaned,  that  it  does  not  speak  what  Jesus 
thought  of  or  what  John  entreated.  The  great  idea  is,  that 
in  this  unity  of  spirit,  this  imity  of  hope,  this  unity  of  desire, 
all  these  scattered  individuals,  who  in  Cappadocia,  in  Meso- 
potamia, in  the  parts  about  Cyrene,  or  in  imperial  Rome, 
love  the  Lord,  will,  of  course,  love  each  other;  and  that, 
without  tablets  of  stone,  without  articles  of  confederation, 
without  compromise  or  constitution,  without  a  contract  mu- 
tually signed,  without  a  covenant  drawn  up  and  attested, 
most  of  all,  without  a  creed  defining  shades  of  opinion,  that 
great  unorganized  company  will  be  one ;  one,  without  writ- 
ten instrument  or  formal  definition,  even  as  Christ  and  God 
are  one ;  one  in  spirit,  one  in  object,  one  in  motive,  one  in 
hope,  one  in  victory. 


40 


Under  this  conception,  when  the  apostles  speak  of  the  dis- 
ciples, they  speak  of  them  as  followers  of  Christ,  just  as  he 
did.  The  test-sign  of  that  following  was  the  taking  the 
cursed,  detested,  and  despised  name  of  Christ.  Were  they 
wilKng  to  do  that  ?  Yes !  if  they  believed  in  him  as  their 
Saviour.  No  !  if  they  believed  in  themselves.  Thus  is  it, 
that  following  him,  or  taking  his  name,  were  the  tests,  and 
the  only  tests,  of  belief  in  him.  And  belief  in  him  is  — 
belief  in  Him  !  It  is  not  the  belief  in  any  council  of  bishops, 
who  have  developed  scientifically  the  doctrine  he  reserved. 
It  is  not  the  belief  in  any  Athan'asius,  who  has  proposed  a 
definition  of  his  nature.  It  is  not  the  belief  of  any  theory  of 
his  person.  It  is  not  the  belief  of  any  genealogy  about  him. 
It  is  the  loyal  acceptance  of  him  as  the  Leader  of  life,  as  the 
Anointed  of  his  God  and  ours. 

Certainly,  then,  I  do  not  ask  you  to  examine  these  texts  of 
definition,  or  those  from  Jesus'  own  lips,  which  I  collected 
last  Sunday,  with  any  view  to  distilling  from  them  a  doctrine 
of  his  person.  Unitarian  or  Trinitarian.  True,  they  are, 
in  fact.  Unitarian  in  every  tittle,  —  helplessly  Unitarian, 
pitilessly  Unitarian,  as  we  have  seen  Trinitarian  critics, 
Roman  and  Protestant,  allow.  But  it  is  not  for  that  that  I 
quote  them :  I  quote  them  to  show  that  the  idea  of  Jesus 
and  the  apostles  was  of  something  entirely  beyond  the  acci- 
dental concurrence  of  metaphysical  or  historical  opinion.  The 
unity  of  the  church  which  they  contemplated  was  infinitely 
more  grand :  so  they  describe  it  as  one  body,  of  one  life,  of 
one  soul,  whose  very  strength  consists  in  the  utter  unlikeness 
of  its  members.  Or  now  it  is  a  great  kingdom,  with  one 
king,  but  with  subjects  so  different  from  each  other,  —  the 
parts  wholly  unlike ;  green  meadows  here,  blessed  by  the 
sunshine ;  bleak  mountain-cliffs  there,  breasting  the  storm. 
To  describe  the  range  of  that  kingdom,  Jesus  himself  declares 
human  language  powerless.  Why,  he  takes  his  images  from 
the  lightning  blazing  thi'ough  the  whole  sky,  from  the  deluge 
whelming  the  whole  earth,  and  then  says  those  images  aie  too 


41 


narrow.  Never  does  he,  never  do  his,  stoop  from  such 
images  to  any  wretched  verbal  formulas  in  the  least  resem- 
bling our  covenants  or  creeds.  Everywhere,  rather,  there  is 
the  idea,  not  of  an  enlisted  army,  measured  by  one  fixed 
standard,  and  known  by  one  fixed  confession ;  but  of  a  whole 
land  revealed  in  the  darkness  of  midnight  by  one  flash  of 
lightning;  or,  as  in  the  other  figure,  of  this  great  rolling 
ocean,  which  looks  up  to  God,  is  ordered  by  God,  and  obeys 
God,  though  each  wave-crest  offers  its  own  homage,  each 
tide-surge  worships  in  its  own  way.  "  How  lawless  !  "  mut- 
ters the  scientific  theologian,  standing  on  the  beach.  "  What 
rebels  !  "  cries  the  petty  prince  from  some  sectarian  heptar- 
chy, as  the  disobedient  tide  drives  him  from  his  throne  upon 
the  sand.  But  the  great  God  looks  on,  and  sees  that  there  is 
no  rebellion,  and  that  there  is  perfect  law.  This  ocean  never 
rests.  It  pants,  it  heaves,  or  it  throws  up  its  blue  waves  till 
they  crest  themselves  with  white,  and  faint  away ;  or  they 
poiir  on  incessant,  one  infinite  procession,  to  fling  themselves 
in  order  against  the  shore ;  or  they  drop  into  a  sleep,  which 
is  not  death,  but  breathes  steadily  and  regularly  as  a  sleeping 
child,  and  so  in  their  calm  reflect  the  blue  of  heaven ;  or 
they  fling  themselves  higher  and  higher  toward  the  sky,  drop- 
ping down  exhausted,  only  to  start  up  again  with  one  effort 
more ;  or,  lying  still  beneath  His  sunshine,  they  deliver  to 
his  demand  the  unseen  vapors,  which  he  transfuses  into  deli- 
cious showers  with  which  to  bless  the  thirsty  ground.  And 
in  this  rest  or  in  that  convulsion,  tide-wave,  wind-wave, 
white  crest,  spray-dust,  or  unseen  vapor-cloud,  each,  in  its  own 
beautiful  service,  obeys  one  law  of  attraction,  —  fulfils  the 
word  of  Him  who  sets  it  in  order.  That  is  the  image  Christ 
chooses  to  describe  his  church.  There  is  no  precise  similarity 
between  its  combing  waves ;  nay,  none  between  the  separate 
drops  which  make  up  its  waves.  But,  because  they  all  obey 
one  law  of  love,  the  church,  the  kingdom  of  the  Lord,  is  one. 
The  believers  are  one  in  life  ;  or,  if  we  analyze  life  into  its 
elements,  they  are  one  in  faith,  one  in  hope,  one  in  love,  — 

6 


42 


the  greatest  of  the  three.  Here  are  two  words  which  the  men 
of  science  have  never  been  able  to  pervert.  Love  and  Hope, 
they  can  do  nothing  with  :  they  escape  their  crucibles.  So 
far  as  they  have  compelled  the  church  to  wear  one  uniform,  it 
has  not  been  by  quoting  any  of  the  texts  which  speak  of  Love, 
or  of  Hope,  her  gracious  sister.  They  have  rather  sought  to 
digest  their  systems  by  what  is  said  of  Faith  ;  and  it  has  only 
been  by  dwarfing  the  idea  of  Faith,  by  cramping  her  feet 
with  Chinese  sandals,  confining  her  chest  as  with  iron  corsets, 
stopping  her  mouth  as  with  the  gag  of  the  Inquisition,  blind- 
ing her  eyes  as  with  the  bandage  of  the  executioner,  by 
handcuffing  her  hands,  by  fettering  her  feet,  and  then  clipping 
the  feathers  of  her  angel- wings,  that  the  Church  has  succeed- 
ed at  all  in  her  interpretation  of  Faith  to  her  children.  Why, 
Jesus  spoke  to  a  sect  of  literal  verbalists.  Paul  spoke  to 
nations  of  mere  sensual  tastes.  And  all  the  apostles  —  nay, 
all  preachers  to  this  day  —  are  thus  addressing  a  world  which 
asks  for  tangible  signs  ;  which  likes  to  go  where  it  can  see 
or  hear  or  taste ;  which  lives,  as  the  brutes  live,  by  the  laws 
of  external  matter.  To  such  a  world,  Jesus  speaks.  To  such 
a  world  he  brings  life  ;  and  that  life  is,  that  it  shall  not 
seek  longer  for  these  signs  without,  but  listen  to  God  within. 
It  is  to  live,  not  by  the  evidence  of  the  seen,  but  by  the  evi- 
dence of  things  which  are  not  seen.  It  is  to  listen,  not  to 
thunders  and  earthquakes,  not  to  tempests,  not  to  trumpets,  not 
to  explosions,  but  to  a  still  small  voice,  —  to  the  present  God. 
You  are  all  God's  children  :  listen  all  to  your  Father.  God 
is  not  far  from  you  :  his  kingdom  is  at  hand.  Here  is  God  ; 
now  is  God.     Listen  and  obey. 

Who  listen,  listen  in  faith ;  who  obey,  obey  in  faith.  And 
we  need  not  wonder,  therefore,  that  Jesus  and  the  Twelve,  in 
one  unbroken  appeal,  beg  for  more  faith,  and  more.  We 
need  not  wonder  that  faith,  which  is  the  evidence  of  things 
not  seen,  should  be  allied  with  hope,  because  God  is  good, 
and  with  love  to  all  God's  children ;  that  the  three  are  dis- 
played as  the  elements  of  the  angels'  life,  of  our  lives  eternal. 


43 


In  seeking  faith  like  that,  what  madness  to  return  to  Jewish 
letter- worship !  What  madness  again  to  turn,  like  Greeks, 
away  from  the  voice  of  the  present  Spirit,  when  we  seek  it ! 
This  faith  is  the  sense  of  law  above.  All  written  law  —  we 
will  not  try  to  write  that  down.  This  living  God,  in  whom 
we  Uve,  in  whom  we  move,  in  whom  we  have  our  being,  — 
we  will  not  define  him  in  words,  —  which  is  to  set  limits  to 
him  in  words,  —  more  than  we  would  define  him  or  display 
him  in  ivory,  in  silver,  or  in  gold.  This  Holy  Spirit  is  God 
in  our  hearts,  lives  in  us,  and  gives  us  life.  Let  us  welcome 
him,  make  him  at  home  by  our  welcome,  and  obey  him  in 
ovu*  Hves.  Thus,  and  thus  only,  shall  we  know  that  Scrip- 
ture, that  "by  faith  the  just  shall  live." 


IV. 


"Ye  believe  in  God:   believe  also  in  me." — John  xiv.  1. 

I  HAVE  now  examined  the  definitions  of  Christianity  left 
us  by  Jesus  Christ  and  by  his  apostles.  I  have  not  done  so 
because  we  ought  to  take  any  one  of  them,  and  go  about 
measuring  other  people's  Christianity  by  it ;  and  certainly  I 
have  not  done  so  because  we  ought  to  satisfy  ourselves  by 
any  limitation  on  our  Christianity  which  any  single  definition 
may  imply.  The  Christian  life  knows  no  limitations.  It  must 
be  improving,  or  it  is  nothing.  No  :  I  have  asked  you  to 
study  these  definitions  rather,  because  they  are  generally 
overlooked  in  the  popular  discussion  of  the  essentials  of 
Christianity.  A  habit  has  sprung  up,  of  giving  the  name 
evangelical,  or  gospel-horn,  to  that  system  of  theology  of  which 
the  earliest  definition  was  made  in  the  Athanasian  Creed  more 
than  four  hundred  years  after  Christ's  death.*  The  word 
**  evangelical "  is  thus  used  by  one  of  owx  sects  in  religion. 
It  is  true,  that,  in  the  same  way,  the  word  "  democratic  "  is 
used  as  a  name  by  one  of  three  parties  in  our  politics,  though 
all  the  three  hold  to  democratic  government ;  and  the  word 
"  republican  "  by  another,  though  they  all  hold  to  repub- 
lican government ;  and  the  word  "  American  "  by  a  third, 
though  all  three  hold  to  American  government.  And  it  is  in 
this  way  that  the  habit  has  grown  up  of  calling  those  sects 
"  evangelical "  who  hold  to  the  present  modified  forms  of 
Calvin's  recension  on  Anselm's  improvements  upon  Athana- 


*  For  the  Athanasian  Creed  is  not  the  work  of  Athanasius,  and  cannot  be 
traced  farther  back  than  the  end  of  the  fifth  century. 


45 


sius  and  Augustine.  I  think  there  is  some  danger  in  the 
constant  use  of  such  a  phrase,  without  an  occasional  protest. 
I  have,  therefore,  thought  best  to  renew  that  protest  now.  I 
have  quoted  Christ's  definitions  of  Chi'istianity,  and  the  defi- 
nitions made  by  his  apostles,  to  show  that  they  did  not  restrict 
Christianity  within  the  dogmatic  lines  of  our  "  scientific  theo- 
logies." 

I  have  had  another  object,  more  important  than  this.  In 
the  first  of  four  sermons,  I  gave  my  authorities  for  saying 
that  the  leading  Trinitarian  authorities  of  our  time  no  longer 
attempt  the  direct  support  of  their  theories  from  the  Gos- 
pels, but  seek  it  rather  in  that  "  development "  which  the 
church  made  from  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospels.  In  especial, 
they  recur  to  the  work  of  the  Fathers  of  the  fourth  and  fifth 
centuries  in  that  development.  They  grant,  what  I  claim, 
that  in  the  New  Testament,  as  it  stands,  their  theories  would 
scarcely  be  discovered  by  one  not  previously  informed  ;  but, 
still,  they  claim  that  they  are  latent  there.  They  are  hidden 
away,  ready  to  come  forth  when  one  knocks  at  the  door  who 
is  rightly  commissioned,  well  instructed,  and  inspired  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Thus  the  church  of  Rome  even  now  defines 
new  doctrines.  Thus,  in  the  English  Church,  we  are  told, 
that,  when  Christ  died,  the  apostles  themselves  had  never 
heard  the  story  of  his  birth,  —  not  even  from  Mary  mother. 
It  was  not  until  after  he  died  that  the  Holy  Spirit  prepared 
their  minds  to  receive  it.  And  the  very  latest  commentator  in 
this  line  tells  us  that  Jesus  left  the  apostles  Unitarians  ;  only 
he  meant,  that  in  a  remoter  and  calmer  period,  by  a  sponta- 
neous voice,  they  should  address  to  him  that  homage,  due  to 
an  infinite  God,  which  now  he  condescended  not  to  claim.  He 
kept  it  in  reserve. 

Now,  I  say  again,  that  I  have  no  objection  to  the  statement, 
that  there  is  much  more  in  the  Bible  than  he  who  runs  can 
read ;  and  I  thank  God  with  all  my  heart,  that  the  Orthodox 
schools  are  beginning  to  firee  themselves  from  the  old  slavery 
of  the  letter.     I  thank  God  that  they  are  working  round  to 


46 


see  that  the  Christianity  of  every  generation  ought  to  be  on  a 
higher  plane  than  that  of  the  generation  before.  Is  this 
kingdom  a  tree  ?  —  it  ought  to  grow  from  year  to  year.  Is  it 
a  fire  ?  —  it  ought  to  be  hotter  with  every  new  day.  A  great 
point  has  been  gained  on  the  old  critical  hammering  over 
aorists  and  particles,  the  old  battles  about  readings  and 
manuscripts,  when  the  leaders  of  the  creed-bound  sects  are 
forced  to  say,  that  they  hold  to  truth  which  the  mere  letter  of 
Scripture  does  not  teach  them.  "  Or,  let  me  say  more  simply,  a 
great  point  is  gained,  if  now  they  give  the  Holy  Spirit  some 
present  share  in  the  instruction  of  the  world. 

Certainly  I  welcome  the  theory  of  the  development  of 
doctrine,  especially  when  it  comes  from  such  lips  as  these. 
The  world  has  waited  for  it  long  enough ;  and,  in  God's 
mercy,  it  has  come.  It  is  only  in  a  point  of  detail  that  we 
have  to  take  issue  with  those  who  proclaim  it. 

Who  is  to  develop  the  doctrine  ?  They  answer,  "  The  Holy 
Spirit."  So  do  we.  The  Holy  Spirit  is  to  unfold  it.  We  are 
still  in  accord ;  nay,  in  unison.  Who  shall  the  Holy  Spirit 
speak  to  ?  Here  comes  the  present  point  of  diiference.  Who 
shall  the  Holy  Spirit  speak  to  ? 

1.  The  Roman  Church  says,  he  shall  speak  to  a  council  of 
bishops  called  by  the  Pope. 

2.  All  Protestant  Orthodoxy  says  he  spoke  to  certain  coun- 
cils of  bishops  held  at  Nice,  at  Constantinople,  at  Toledo, 
and  at  other  places,  between  thirteen  and  fifteen  centuries 

ago- 

3.  All  Liberalism  says  yet  again,  tKe  Holy  Spirit  must 
speak  to  tbs,  or  we  cannot  hear.  In  us  he  must  develop  this 
doctrine ;  and  we  will  not  go  for  the  development  to  any 
council,  nor  to  any  Ambrose,  Augustine,  Athanasius,  Origen, 
or  Irenseus,  of  them  all. 

Between  these  three  answers  is  Christendom  divided.  Of 
the  Roman  answer,  I  now  say  nothing.  Of  the  Orthodox 
answer,  I  know  that  my  statement  seems  hard.  I  know  that 
Protestant  Orthodoxy  does  not  like  to  admit  its  dependence 


47 


on  the  great  definitions  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries.  But 
I  cannot  help  that.  So  long  as  Orthodoxy  di'inks  that  cup, 
it  is  nothing  that  she  winces.  She  takes  the  advantages  of 
those  definitions :  she  must  take  their  disadvantages.  She 
holds  up,  I  mean,  what  she  calls  the  assent  of  the  church, 
from  the  time  of  Athanasius  to  the  time  of  Luther,  in  the 
doctrines  of  the  Trinity,  of  total  depravity,  and  of  the  suffer- 
ing of  God,  for  man's  offences,  in  the  place  of  man.  She 
paints  you  the  grand  picture  of  an  undivided  church  placidly 
marching  on  in  these  doctrines  for  those  thousand  years,  —  a 
blessed  millennium.  She  shows  you  that  modern  dissent  from 
them  is  only  three  centuries  old  :  that  it  was  only  when  the 
Bible  was  thrown  open ;  only  when  printing  began ;  only  when 
the  Commons  first  gained  their  rights  in  the  State,  and  free 
inquiry  first  got  its  own ;  only  then  that  the  separate  mur- 
murs got  voice  loud  enough  to  be  heard.  She  shows  you, 
that,  for  the  blessed  thousand  years  before,  those  definitions 
had  not  been  challenged  :  they  had  been  held  fixed  and  sure. 
She  claims  all  the  immense  advantage  of  the  fact,  that  the 
poetry  of  that  thousand  years,  its  other  fine  art,  and  its  rich 
stores  of  devotional  expression,  formed  themselves  around 
the  theological  formulas  drawn  up  for  the  church  by  the 
councils  which  I  have  named,  and  the  men  who  wrought  for 
them.  "  See  how  men  did  agree,"  she  cries,  "in  the" darkest 
ages  of  the  church  !  "     Why  should  they  not  agree  now  ? 

I  say,  that  an  Orthodoxy  which  takes  these  advantages 
from  the  assent  to  one  system  of  scientific  theology  through 
the  dark  ages  must  take  the  disadvantages  also.  It  is  true, 
that  after  Europe  grew  bai'barous,  and  broke  up  into  different 
countries,  without  common  ties,  all  the  churches  in  those 
countries  held  nominally  to  the  standards  of  scientific  theolo- 
gy laid  down  before  the  division.  It  is  true  also,  that  during 
a  thousand  years  of  sleep,  in  which  no  new  principle  in 
science  was  established,  none  was  established  in  scientific 
theology.  No  improvement  was  made  ifi  government,  none 
in  education,  none  in  law,  none  in  literature.     As  little  was 


48 


any  made  in  the  formulas  of  ecclesiastical  opinion.  It  is  true, 
that,  during  those  centuries  in  which  no  author  rose  to  any 
sort  of  lasting  eminence  in  any  walk  of  science  or  of  letters, 
no  great  change  was  attempted  in  the  theological  formulas 
which  had  been  laid  down  before  the  dissolution  of  the 
Roman  Empire.  But  it  is  true,  on  the  other  hand,  that, 
the  moment  the  world  was  re-born,  the  men,  from  whom 
its  new  birth  is  dated,  protested,  every  one  of  them,  against 
some  feature  of  those  formulas.  The  dawn  of  the  modern 
world  is  to  be  hailed  in  the  work  of  such  men  as  Dante, 
as  Chaucer  and  Wiclif,  as  Tauler  and  Thomas  a  Kempis ; 
heretics,  every  man  of  them  !  men  who  began,  with  the  first 
struggles  of  their  new  Hfe,  the  protest,  which  will  never  die, 
against  the -uniformity  of  the  dead  millennium.  Granting, 
however,  that  substantial  uniformity  which  existed  for  a 
thousand  years  before :  I  say.  Orthodoxy  must  take  the  sour 
with  the  sweet.  She  asks  us  to  assent  to  that  to  which  the 
leaders  of  the  universal  church  assented  so  long ;  and  we  ask, 
"  What  was  the  authority  to  which  they  assented  ?  "  The 
necessary  answer  is,  "  The  Athanasian  Creed,  and  the  Fathers 
who  cluster  around  that  creed.  They  are  to  be  oiu*  judges  in 
the  scientific  development  of  doctrine." 

To  persons  fond  of  history,  it  is  well  worth  while  to  study 
the  conflicting  views  of  those  Fathers  and  those  councils. 
They  may,  with  profit,  go  back  to  the  tangled  web  of 
opinions  out  of  which  the  creeds  of  those  councils  were 
born.  These  councils  all  had  equal  rights.  Yet,  of  some, 
the  decisions  live  a  day ;  of  some,  the  creeds  claim  to  be  for 
ever  the  scientific  doctrine  of  Christendom.  But  we  need 
not  here  follow  Orthodoxy  into  that  line  of  study. 

For  Liberalism  in  religion  makes  the  third  answer  I  have 
named.  We  claim  that  the  Holy  Spirit  must  help  us  to 
the  development  of  Christian  doctrine.  We  cannot  admit  the 
authority  over  us  of  any  of  those  councils  or  any  of  those 
men.  Undoubtedly  they  had  right  to  develop  scientific 
doctrine  from  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  and  of  the  six  apostles 


49 


and  two  evangelists  who  left  writings  behind ;  but  the 
church  of  to-day  has  the  same  right,  and  it  has  just  as 
much  material  to  work  upon.  If  the  world  to-day  is 
purer  and  better  than  it  was  in  the  days  of  the  crash  of 
the  Roman  Empire ;  if  our  civilization  is  more  Christian, 
if  our  science  is  more  careful,  if  our  learning  is  more  pro- 
found, than  those  of  the  Eastern  and  Western  Empire,  just 
as  their  lights  flickered  out  in  thick  darkness,  —  we  have 
a  better  right  to  develop  doctrine  than  had  any  of  these 
councils  or  any  of  these  Fathers.  To  pretend  that  they 
had  any  traditions  as  to  doctrine,  which  had  escaped  every 
pen  for  three  centuries,  is  absurd.  How  much  tradition 
have  you  in  your  famihes,  of  what  yoiir  ancestors  knew 
or  what  they  suffered,  of  what  was  their  opinion  or  what 
their  martyrdoms,  when  they  were  English  men  and  women, 
three  centuries  ago,  living  under  the  reigns  of  Henry  the 
Eighth  and  Bloody  Mary?  And  to  submit  the  doctrine  of 
the  church  to  the  arbitration  of  the  bishops  of  that  barbarous 
age,  when  they  were  themselves  at  civil  war  regarding  the 
arbitration ;  to  take  for  the  agreed  formula  of  doctrine  a 
statement  drawn  up  in  a  time  so  benighted,  that  not  one  of 
its  statements  in  law,  in  morals,  in  poetry,  or  in  philosophy, 
is  esteemed  worth  a  straw,  —  is  only  an  indication  of  the 
difficulty,  amounting  almost  to  impossibility,  of  agreeing 
upon  any  formula.  The  truth  is,  that,  after  the  Athanasian 
formula  had  imposed  itself  upon  Christendom,  Christendom 
sunk  into  a  night  so  deep,  that,  for  a  thousand  years,  it 
could  not  even  protest  any  longer.  To  this  death-like 
torpor  its  millennium  of  uniformity  is  due. 

I  do  not,  then,  pursue  the  history  of  the  definitions  of 
doctrine  any  farther  down.  After  we  have  left  the  apostolic 
definitions  of  Christianity,  there  are  none  which  have  higher 
claim  to  deference  than  our  own.  We  stand,  therefore,  by 
the  Liberal  answer,  as  to  the  development  of  doctrine.  The 
Holy  Spirit  shall  unfold  to  our  hearts  the  doctrine  of  the 

7 


50 


Lord.  We  reject,  from  end  to  end,  any  special  authority 
of  the  Fathers. 

At  this  point  it  is  that  Liberal  religion  meets  the  anx- 
iety constantly  expressed,  —  that,  in  our  religious  system, 
we  are  nowhere.  Liberahsm,  people  say,  is  Latitudinarian- 
ism.  Religious  freedom,  they  say,  is  the  freedom  to  have 
no  religion.  One  man's  religion  is  one  thing,  and  another's 
is  another :  therefore  unity  is  impossible.  This  anxiety 
expresses  itself  in  a  thousand  ways.  "  You  make  religion 
something  all  out-doors,"  says  one ;  and  others  ask  us,  and 
very  fairly,  "  What  do  you  believe,  if  you  are  not  bound  to 
formulas  of  scientific  doctrine  ?  "  —  "  Unitarians  have  a  name  : 
what  does  that  name  mean  ? "  — "  What  is  the  starting- 
point  ?  "  —  "  Grant  that,  in  the  Liberal  body,  there  is  wider 
range  than  in  the  bodies  of  close  communion :  what  are 
their  points  of  unity,  of  agreement,  of  accord  ? " 

This  is  a  class  of  questions  which  we  Liberal  Christians 
ought  to  answer.  It  is  mere  child's  play  for  us  to  say  that 
we  do  what  we  think  right,  every  man  in  his  own  eyes. 
We  stand  before  the  world,  and  want  to  give  our  light 
to  the  world.  That  light  is  real,  and  we  have  to  show 
that  it  is  real.  We  claim  to  be  Christians.  We  must,  then, 
show  a  vital  tie  to  Jesus  Christ.  When,  then,  men  say, 
"  You  put  Christianity  all  out-doors,"  I  answer,  "  Yes,  we  do ; 
or,  rather,  the  Lord  did  it  for  us."  *  The  new  covenant  is 
disin thralled,  unfettered;  and  those  who  accept  it  are  free 
in  the  range  of  heaven.  When  they  say,  again,  "  Who  are 
you  ?  what  are  you  ?  what  do  you  believe  ? "  I  answer, 
"  We  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ; "  or,  in  the  words 
of  Peter's  confession,  —  which  Christ  himself  calls  the  cor- 
ner-stone of  his  church,  —  "  That  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the 
Son  of  the  living  God." 

Of  this  statement,  however,  —  which  seems  to  me  ample 
as  to  the    foundation,  and  as  much  as   any  Christian   man 

*  I  owe  this  very  happy  epigram  to  the  most  modest  of  my  friends. 


51 


has  a  right  to  demand  of  a  Christian  brother,  —  a  "  sci- 
entific theology "  complains  that  it  is  indefinite ;  and  a 
storm  of  after-questions  follows,  as  to  how  we  test  disciple- 
ship  :  "  How  do  we  define  it  ?  how  do  we  explain  it  ?  "  To 
which  the  logical  answer  is.  That  it  is  none  of  our  business 
to  test  it,  to  define  it,  or  to  explain  it.  We  are  expressly 
warned  not  to  judge,  lest  we  be  judged.  We  are  ex- 
pressly told  that  Jesus  himself  will  not  judge  our  opinions ; 
that  there  is  One  that  judge th,  —  his  God  and  ours.  I 
conceive  this  to  be  a  sufficient  logical  answer.  But,  be- 
cause I  grant  that  a  logical  answer  never  satisfies  curiosity 
with  unlogical  minds,  I  never  rest  upon  this  answer.  I 
am  always  wilHng  to  say  that  the  tests  of  discipleship  are 
laid  down  by  Jesus  and  by  the  apostles,  and  that  I  am 
willing  to  abide  by  any  of  them.  Thus :  "  By  this  shall 
men  know  that  ye  are  my  disciples,  if  ye  have  love  one 
to  another ; "  or,  *'  Whoso  doeth  the  ^vill  of  God,  the 
same  is  my  mother  or  sister  or  brother ; "  or,  "  Can  any 
man  forbid  water  that  these  should  be  baptized,  who  have 
received  the  Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  we  ? "  Take  these  as 
tests,  or  any  other  of  the  seventy  definitions  of  discipleship 
which  you  may  find  in  the  New  Testament. 

It  is  at  this  point  that  the  two  wings  of  the  church  really 
part  company.  The  sects  ^vith  scientific  creeds  want  us  to  go 
on,  and  make  scientific  definition  of  the  person  of  Christ,  the 
person  of  God,  the  person  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  rest. 
On  our  part,  we  decline  that  definition,  except  as  matter 
of  curiosity  :  we  declare  that  it  has  no  concern  whatever 
with  the  essentials  of  discipleship.  It  is  on  that  demand 
for  uniform  definition  on  the  one  hand,  and  on  that  refusal 
on  the  other,  that  the  great  issue  joins. 

I  confess,  the  division  does  not  seem  to  me  the  important 
breach  which  they  consider  it  on  the  other  side.  I  am  sorry 
for  them.  I  pity  them  from  the  bottom  of  my  heart.  I  believe 
all  rangers,  all  light  troops,  always  pity  the  men  who  are  caged 
up  in  garrisons.     I  believe  all  men  who  can  go  out-doors 


52 


always  pity  those  who  are  forced  to  stay  at  home.  But, 
while  I  pity  them,  I  know,  of  course,  that  soldiers  in  gar- 
rison also  do  good  service ;  and  really  it  is  so  easy  to  desert, 
that  one  need  not  shed  tears  for  those  who  choose  to  stay. 
And,  on  the  other  hand,  for  any  one  of  us  who  gets  tired 
of  freedom,  who  wants  to  rest  himself  in-doors,  I  am  sure 
there  always  seems  to  be  a  very  cordial  welcome.  I  cannot 
conceive  that  the  world  is  long  to  be  deluded  by  the  belief 
that  the  Liberal  schools  are  false  or  dangerous,  so  long 
as  we  loyally  build  on  the  same  foundation  on  which  the 
Orthodox  schools  affect  to  build.  We  build  on  the  rock 
which  they  build  upon.  From  the  essential,  they  develop 
doctrine  in  their  way  :  we  develop  it  in  ours.  What  then  ? 
Why,  every  man's  work  that  he  has  builded  will  be  tried 
as  by  a  fiery  trial.  The  gold  will  stand;  the  stubble  will 
be  burned.  I  am  willing  to  leave  the  test  of  our  develop- 
ments there. 

For,  to  conclude  this  review  of  the  Foundations,  there 
are  certain  essential  facts  of  Christianity  about  which  the 
church  has  never  divided.  It  is  perfectly  easy  to  fix  a 
starting-point  from  which  the  different  lines  of  development 
begin.  These  essential  facts  may  be  stated  in  the  words  of 
Scripture,  or  they  may  be  condensed  into  shorter  expression. 
It  was  in  the  efibrt,  doubtless,  to  state  these  facts  briefly,  that 
creeds  began.  The  earliest  creeds  are  only  short  digests  of 
the  facts  of  Christianity.  It  was  only  in  later  times,  less 
rehgious  and  more  speculative,  that  creeds  took  the  shape 
of  the  resolutions  which  we  pass  at  public  meetings;  when, 
from  statements  of  fact  which  could  be  proved  or  disproved, 
they  became  statements  of  mere  speculation  or  opinion. 
Early  in  the  history  of  the  church,  several  of  these  simple 
creeds  were  digested  into  the  creed  which  the  whole  church 
has  used  in  its  practice  from  that  day  to  this  day,  —  the 
creed  which  takes  the  name  of  the  Apostles'  Creed.  This 
creed  contains  the  facts  from  which  all  Christians  start  in 
their  separate  development  of  doctrines.     This  is  the  creed 


53 


which  the  older  churches  taught  to  their  children  in  their 
infancy.  Its  substance  had  established  itself,  I  think,  within 
three  hundred  years  after  Jesus  died.  It  was,  therefore, 
substantially  in  wide  use  before  the  passion  for  scientific 
theology  began.  After  that  fashion  came  in,  it  was  still 
the  formula  for  all  but  the  learned.  And  when  we  picture 
to  ourselves  the  great  company  of  believers,  pressing  on  with 
one  accord  to  the  heavenly  city ;  when  we  look  in  fancy  on 
the  deathbeds  which  have  been  cheered,  on  the  martyrs  who 
have  passed  to  glory,  under  the  light  of  one  Lord,  one  faith, 
and  one  baptism,  —  if  we  descend  so  low  as  to  ask  what  Avere 
the  concurrent  opinions  of  all  this  host,  we  have  no  right 
to  suppose  that  they  held  to  the  thunders  of  the  Athanasian 
Confession.  The  Church  has  never  taught  it  to  her  babes, 
never  proclaimed  it  in  her  daily  worship.  She  has  held  it 
in  reserve,  as  a  choice  symbol  for  those  elect  to  her  mysteries. 
She  has  never  put  it  in  the  forefront  of  her  ritual,  of  her 
catechizing,  of  her  missions.  When  she  taught  the  Lord's 
Prayer  to  her  little  ones,  she  has  taught  them  another  creed 
as  the  accepted  digest  of  the  facts  of  their  rehgion.  That 
practical  creed  of  Christendom  has  proved  to  be  enough  for 
the  Chiirch's  humbler  martyrs,  if  it  were  not  enough  for  her 
philosophers ;  and  they,  as  they  went  to  daily  martyrdom  or 
to  the  martyrdom  of  the  stake,  have  gone  there,  even  igno- 
rant of  the  existence  of  the  uninteUigible  formula,  as  fol- 
lowers of  a  Master  whom  they  knew  and  loved. 

That  earliest  creed  describes  the  historical  belief  of  every 
Unitarian  as  well  as  of  every  Trinitarian.  It  describes  ours 
better  than  it  describes  theirs.*  It  is  the  creed  which,  Bishop 
Newman  says,  favors  the  Unitarian  rather  than  the  Trini- 
tarian hypothesis.     That  creed  I  shall  teach  to  my  children. 


*  Thus  the  Trinitarians  of  almost  all  schools  are  fond  of  maintaining  that  Christ, 
the  second  person  in  the  Trinity,  "  made  the  worlds."  Thus  Alford  says,  "  The 
Logos  is  identiciil  with  Jesus  Christ:  ...  it  is  he  who  made  the  worlds."  Yet  the 
Apostles'  Creed  distinctly  says  that  God  the  Father,  the  first  person  in  the  Trinity, 
is  the  Maker  of  heaven  and  earth. 


54 


as  an  answer  to  this  daily  question,  *^  What  do  Unitarians 
believe  ?  "  I  advise  you,  my  friends,  to  teach  it  to  yours ; 
not  because  it  is  so  complete  a  statement  as  the  statement  of 
Christ  himself,  but  because  it  is  a  statement  which,  through 
all  history,  the  Church  has  held  to,  and  which,  though  it 
might  contain  much  more  indeed,  is  still  a  symbol  of  her 
union.  This  creed  and  the  Lord's  Supper  survive  through 
all  the  storms  of  discussion  and  of  science,  as  two  external 
symbols,  —  that,  at  heart,  the  Church  is  one. 

"  I  believe  in  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of  heaven  and 
earth. 

And  in  Jesus  Christ,  his  only  Son,  our  Lord ; 

Who  was  conceived  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 

Born  of  the  Virgin  Mary ; 

Suffered  under  Pontius  Pilate ; 

Was  crucified,  dead,  and  buried  ; 

The  third  day,  he  rose  from  the  dead ; 

He  ascended  into  heaven,  and  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  God, 
the  Father  Almighty ; 

From  thence  he  shall  come  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead. 

I  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost, 

The  holy  catholic  church, 

The  communion  of  saints, 

The  forgiveness  of  sins, 

The  resurrection  of  the  body, 

And  the  life  everlasting." 

There  is  the  condensed  statement  of  the  facts  of  religion, 
which,  for  fifteen  hundred  years  or  more,  the  Church  at  large 
has  taught  to  her  children.  In  later  years,  one  phrase  was 
added  to  it,  which  I  have  not  read,  because  it  is  unquestion- 
ably modern.  I  confess,  that  a  better  statement  might  be 
made  from  the  very  words  of  the  apostles ;  but,  as  it  hap- 
pened, this  statement  was  made,  —  a  statement  of  the  foun- 
dation-facts ofyOiristianity.  It  is  a  statement  to  which,  fairly 
interpreted,  every  Christian  man  may  in  good  faith  assent. 


55 


It  beai's  the  mark,  doubtless,  of  the  time  which  created  it. 
It  has  not  the  simplicity  of  Jesus ;  it  has  not  the  directness 
of  the  apostles,  whose  name  it  bears :  but  it  does  not  leave 
the  facts  in  the  quest  for  speculation  about  the  fact.  In  the 
history  of  the  church,  therefore,  it  marks  well  enough  the 
dividing-point  where  one  wing  of  the  army  marches  off  in 
search  of  a  scientific  theology;  where  the  other  keeps  on 
in  less  scientific  form. 

Of  the  details  of  that  symbol  of  belief,  and,  in  general, 
of  the  Unitarian  efforts  to  unfold  the  doctrines  of  those 
earlier  days,  I  am  to  speak  another  Sunday. 


s  4 


V. 


"  And   I  WILL  PRAY    THE    FATHER,   AND    HE    SHALL    GIVE    YOU    ANOTHER    COM- 
FOKTEK,   THAT  HE   MAY  ABIDE   WITH   YOU   FOR  EVER." — John   xiv.  16. 

What  is  called  the  Apostles'  Creed  was  not  written  by  any 
of  the  apostles.  It  is  not  even  a  very  early  statement  of  the 
historical  facts  of  our  religion.  It  is  rather  a  compilation 
made  from  parts  of  several  early  statements,  with  some  addi- 
tions intended  to  meet  heresies  of  a  later  date.  It  is  not, 
again,  a  specially  successful  abridgment  of  the  great  facts  of 
Christian  history.  None  the  less,  however,  has  it  an  interest 
all  its  own ;  for  it  does  mark  the  union  of  the  whole  church. 
It  lays  down  the  central  facts  to  which  all  Christian  specula- 
tions gravitate,  and  around  which,  in  their  different  orbits, 
they  revolve.  Very  different  are  those  orbits,  it  is  true  ;  and 
those  believers  who  move  in  one,  lead  lives  strangely  different 
from  those  of  others.  As  the  inhabitants  of  the  distant 
Saturn  must  live  in  ways  very  strange  to  us  who  live  upon 
this  world,  so  does  the  Romanist,  in  the  orbit  of  his  faith, 
find  very  different  light  and  heat  in  his  religion  from  what 
you  gain,  or  I,  from  ours.  Yet  as  the  orbit  of  Saturn  and 
that  of  this  earth  alike  are  both  governed  by  the  binding 
influence  of  the  sun,  so  does  every  Christian  believer's  faith 
gravitate  to  the  central  facts  of  Christian  history.  It  must 
be  confessed,  that  some  orbits  axe  Hke  those  of  comets,  and 
that  the  speculators  rush  off,  like  comets,  into  regions  very 
dark  and  very  cold,  —  very  distant,  indeed,  from  the  centre. 
None  the  less  is  the  centre  there.  And  so  we  find  in  history, 
that  while  one  speculation  is  popular  at  one  time,  and  another 
at  another,  so  that  one  or  another  of  the  speculative  creeds  is 
in  fashion  among  the  doctors,  the  real  heart  of  the  church  is 


57 


always  true  to  home.  The  great  central  facts,  about  which 
there  is  no  critical  dispute,  are  held  to  by  that  great  body  of 
men  who  know  but  little  of  the  doctors,  and  care  less  for 
them.  Because  these  central  facts  are  well  enough  stated  in 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  in  a  form  which  has  been  repeated 
through  Christendom  for  fourteen  hundred  years  or  more, 
that  symbol  has  an  importance  all  its  own.  It  becomes  the 
token  of  union;  and  so  it  takes  the  popular  name  of  The 
Creed,  as  if  there  were  no  other.  It  is,  indeed,  a  statement 
which  can  be  understood,  and  can  be  remembered.  It  is  a 
statement  of  subjects  of  fact  which  admit  of  proof.  So  far, 
again,  it  differs  from  those  creeds  of  speculation  which  can 
neither  be  understood,  remembered,  proved,  nor  disproved. 
This  constitutes  its  pre-eminence. 

There  is  no  Christian  who  would  say  that  his  religion  was 
summed  up  in  it.  Yet  almost  every  Christian  man  might,  in 
good  faith,  give  a  general  assent  to  it,  without  twisting  it  from 
a  legitimate  meaning.  I  say  this  boldly  :  for  I  am  sure  the 
Unitarian  can  give  this  assent ;  and  I  know  that  Trinitarians 
do  give  it,  although  I  do  not  understand  how. 

Regarding  God,  the  statement  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  is, 
"  I  believe  in  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  who  made  heaven 
and  earth."  It  thus  opposes  Christianity  to  the  faith  of  the 
Heathen  in  many  gods.  It  states  also  the  great  essential  of 
Christian  theology,  —  that  God  is  our  Father.  In  face,  also, 
of  those  modern  speculators,  who  declare  that  Christ,  the  Son, 
is  the  Maker  of  the  worlds,  it  proclaims  that  God,  the  Father, 
made  this  earth  and  heaven. 

It  continues,  "  And  I  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  his  only  Son, 
our  Lord,"  whose  life  and  death  are  then  briefly  narrated. 
In  the  severe  condensation  of  this  narration  is,  I  think,  the 
greatest  deficiency  of  this  creed.  I  conceive  that  any  man 
can  assent  to  its  statements,  who  believes,  in  general,  that 
Jesus  Christ  was  sent  to  be  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  and 
believes  the  substantial  truth  of  the  narrative  of  the  four 
Gospels.     As  I  said  last  Sunday,  the  clause,  "  He  descended 

8 


58 


into  hell,"  is  admitted  to  be  modern  in  comparison  with  the 
remainder  of  the  creed.  There  is  no  Scripture  which,  in 
any  sense,  sustains  it.  It  is  not,  therefore,  always  read  in  the 
creed ;  and  is  the  one  article  which  is  not  a  point  of  union. 
Those  Protestant  churches,  therefore,  which  read  it,  generally 
explain  it  away.  Thus  the  Westminster  Confession  says,  "  He 
descended  into  hell ;  "  that  is,  "  continued  in  the  state  of  the 
dead."  Now,  in  other  places,  the  same  confession  says, 
that,  at  death,  the  souls  of  the  righteous  ascend  immediately 
into  the  highest  heaven ;  and,  as  Jesus  was  certainly  one  of 
the  righteous,  it  appears  that,  in  the  use  of  this  article  by  a 
Presbyterian  confessor,  the  words,  "  He  descended  into  hell," 
mean,  "  He  ascended  into  the  highest  heaven."  It  is  more 
manly  to  omit  a  clause  than  thus  to  explain  it  away. 

The  statement  of  the  creed,  regarding  the  Holy  Spirit,  is 
simply,  "  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost."  The  Christian  does 
not  merely  believe,  as  the  E{)icurean  does,  that  God  made 
the  world,  and  then  let  it  alone.  He  believes  that  God  is 
in  the  world  now ;  that  he  governs  its  motions  now.  Law  is 
only  the  name  of  the  methods  of  his  action  there.  And  God 
comes  to  every  heart  now,  to  direct  and  inspirit  now.  Con- 
science is  only  the  name  of  the  method  of  his  action  here. 
To  express  this  belief,  the  Christian  says,  "  I  believe  in  the 
Holy  Spirit." 

These  are  the  fundamentals  of  the  creed.  Thus  does  it 
speak  of  man's  relations  to  Christ,  of  Christ's  to  God,  and  of 
man's  to  God.  But  the  creed  goes  farther.  For  the  Chris- 
tian's love  for  Jesus  Christ,  and  his  resolve  to  follow  him,  are 
not  a  lonely  passion  and  determination  :  they  make  an  enthu- 
siasm which  ties  him  to  all  other  men  who  love  Jesus  and 
follow  him.  That  unseen  union  of  them  all  is  expressed  by 
the  words,  "  I  believe  in  the  holy  catholic  church,"  and  "  the 
communion  of  saints." 

Again  :  the  Christian's  certainty  that  sin  makes  no  impas- 
sable barrier  between  him  and  God  is  expressed  in  the  words, 
"  I  beheve  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins." 


59 


His  certainty  of  immortality  must  be  expressed  also.  And 
so,  in  face  of  the  old  Pantheistic  theory  of  the  East,  that,  at 
death,  we  are  absorbed  into  God,  and  lose  our  own  conscious- 
ness ;  that  we  are  blocks  of  ice,  floating  in  the  ocean  of  eter- 
nity, into  which  ocean  we  melt  back  again,  —  the  Christian 
expresses  the  other  certainty,  that  he  shall  possess  a  separate 
conscious  existence.  He  shall  have,  in  heaven,  some  sort  of 
body  of  his  own.  Not,  of  course,  that  earthly  body  which  he 
has  here  :  the  great  Christian  scripture  of  Paul  excludes 
that  notion  ;  so  that  it  is  strange  that  any  section  of  the 
church  ever  tried  for  it.  But  some  body,  such  as  Paul,  in 
paradox,  calls  a  spiritual  body,  will  belong  to  the  soul  in  its 
resurrection. 

And,  lastly,  this  resurrection  is  for  eternal  life.  The 
Father  is  eternal ;  therefore  the  children  are.  And  thus  the 
child,  who,  because  he  is  child,  and  not  creature,  can  begin 
his  confession  by  saying,  "  I  believe  in  God,  the  Father  Al- 
mighty," can  end  it  by  saying,  "  I  believe  in  the  resurrection 
of  the  body  and  in  life  everlasting." 

Around  a  centre  in  which  these  facts  are  embodied,  revolve, 
in  different  orbits,  the  various  systems  of  the  Christian  Church, 
—  its  different  worlds  and  their  satellites.  In  each  system, 
however  small,  the  Christian  life  shows  itself  in  two  forms. 
It  exhibits  itself  thus  in  each  congregation ;  nay,  in  the  two  or 
three  gathered  together,  which  is  the  smallest  possible  sepa- 
rate church.  In  any  two  lives,  it  shows  itself  in  two  forms. 
As,  in  a  compass-needle,  the  northern  electricity  and  the 
southern  take  the  two  ends  of  the  needle,  however  short; 
nay,  as  the  smallest  atom  of  magnetized  iron  has  its  north 
pole  and  its  south :  so  the  least  organization  of  Christian 
believers  has  its  two  poles  of  the  divine  life.  They  get  dif- 
ferent names  in  different  bodies  ;  often  they  have  no  names  : 
but,  wherever  any  congregation  of  Chi'istians  is  alive,  these 
distinct  methods  of  life  appear.  The  names  are  not  generally 
successful ;  the  people  to  whom  they  are  given  seldom  like 


60 


them  :  but  the  distinction  between  the  poles  is  always  obser- 
vable, even  in  the  smallest  meeting  of  those  who  most  nearly 
agree.  They  say,  that  the  day  after  Sir  Humphry  Davy 
had  exhibited,  for  the  first  time,  the  magnetic  spark  as  the 
result  of  an  immense  battery,  which,  with  that  object,  the  Eng- 
lish Government  had  built  for  him.  Dr.  Wollaston  stopped 
a  friend  in  the  street,  and  showed  him  there  the  same  experi- 
ment with  a  little  battery,  which  he  had  made  in  a  lady's 
thimble.  Just  in  that  way,  the  great  divisions  of  the  church 
of  Christ,  which  history  celebrates  and  at  which  theologians 
are  amazed,  result  from  diversities  of  human  character,  which 
you  may  see  when  only  three  persons  are  sitting  together  in 
accidental  intercourse,  if  the  conversation  turns,  simply  and 
truly,  upon  religion. 

When  these  diversities  of  the  lives  of  separate  Christians 
exhibit  themselves  on  the  largest  scale,  we  see  the  two  great 
opposed  systems  of  doctrine  which  divide  the  world.  We 
close  our  survey  of  the  developments  of  doctrine  by  contrast- 
ing these  two  systems. 

At  one  pole  of  opinion,  they  think  that  the  original  plan  of 
this  world  failed ;  that,  by  the  fall  of  the  first  man,  the  origi- 
nal scheme  was  vitiated  so  far,  that  a  new  scheme  was  neces- 
sary to  recover  from  a  wrecked  world  some  fragments  of  the 
human  family.* 

The  opposite  pole  of  opinion  holds,  that,  in  the  general 
design  of  the  world,  there  has  never  been  any  failure ;  that, 
on  the  whole,  the  course  of  the  world,  under  God's  different 
revelations  of  himself,  has  been  steady  improvement ;  that, 
indeed,  God's  system  of  government  always  shows  advance 
from  lower  grades  of  life  to  higher  ;  and  that  he  sent  his  Son, 
at  last,  not  to  rescue  from  a  wreck  a  httle  company  of  his 
children,  but  to  communicate  to  the  whole  world,  to  all  the 
children,  chance  of  higher  life  than  they  had  before. 


*  I  refer  the  careful  student  of  this  view  to  a  seiinon  on  this  subject  by  my 
friend  Kev.  David  A.  Wassou,  —  "The  Universe  no  Failure." 


61 


The  first  pole  of  opinion,  in  consequence  of  its  theory  of 
shipwreck,  holds  to  very  accurate  descriptions  of  those  who  are 
saved.  It  classifies  them.  It  even  writes  down  their  names. 
It  defines  their  opinions ;  and,  in  the  phrases  of  this  set  of 
systems,  those  who  are  on  the  raft  of  safety,  while  the  great 
body  of  their  brethren  gasp  vainly  and  go  down,  are  the  elect 
of  God.* 

The  opposite  opinion,  regarding  Christ  as  the  minister  of 
new  life  to  a  whole  world,  supposes  that  everybody  gets  some 
of  that  life,  even  unconsciously.  We  know  no  limit  to  the 
radiation  of  the  Star  of  Bethlehem.  Wherever  any  filament 
of  human  life,  even  in  commerce,  in  education,  or  in  govern- 
ment, connects  any  human  being  with  the  great  manifestation 
of  God  made  in  Galilee  and  Jerusalem,  we  believe  that  that 
human  being  begins  to  get  the  advantage  which,  in  Christ,  God 
offered  to  the  world.  From  the  savage,  who  first  uses  a  tool 
which  is  the  invention  of  Christian  civilization,  up  to  the 
Florence  Nightingale,  whom  Christ  sends  to  carry  the  life  of 
Christ  to  the  wounded  and  dying,  we  believe  the  work  of  the 
atonement  may  be  traced  in  every  life.  In  such  infinite 
variety  of  operations,  we  find  it  impossible  .to  classify  or  to 
define.  Blessed  are  they  who  are  closest  to  him  who  brings 
the  life,  —  blessed  they ;  for  they  gain  most  of  it.  But  it  is 
not  for  us  to  say  who  gains  just  enough,  or  who  gains  none. 
Christ  came  to  every  living  man;  and,  whoever  gains  any 
blessed  influence  from  him,  let  him  gain  more. 

True  to  the  first  theory,  which  I  have  called  the  theory  of 
shipwreck,  the  schools  which  hold  to  it  suppose,  at  the  end 
of  mortal  life,  an  examination  of  all  who  die.  They  closely 
restrict  those  texts  which  speak  of  the  inevitable  judgment 
passed  upon  all  men ;  and  this  judgment  becomes  simply  a 
judicial  inquiry  as  to  the  way  in  which  they  conducted  them- 
selves here.     Human  life  is,  therefore,  with  those  believers. 


•  Compare  the  tract,  "  The  Life  Preserver,"  No.  431,  vol.  xiii.,  in  the  Ameri- 
can Tract  Society's  series. 


62 


a  scene  of  trial  or  probation ;  at  the  end  of  which,  some  are 
accepted  as  coming  up  to  the  standards,  while  all  the  rest 
are  thrown  by. 

True,  on  the  other  hand,  to  the  other  theory,  that  God 
lifted  up  the  whole  world  when  he  revealed  himself,  we  of 
the  Liberal  schools  conceive  this  world  as  a  place  of  educa- 
tion. It  is  not  mere  trial  or  probation  :  it  is  rather  training 
and  elevation.  Wherever  we  leave  it,  there  we  go  on. 
And  the  judgment  is  not  an  external  decision,  which  cuts  us 
into  two  bodies,  —  the  lost  and  the  saved  :  it  is  the  immediate 
and  self- wrought  consequence  to  every  man  of  the  powers  he 
has  gained,  or  the  sins  by  which  he  is  enslaved.  The  world 
is  not  a  drill-yard,  from  which  recruits  are  to  be  selected,  if 
they  be  tall  enough  and  strong  enough  for  the  household 
troops  of  the  great  Sovereign  :  it  is  rather  the  great  family 
school,  in  which  he  trains  all  his  children  in  the  accents,  the 
habits,  and  the  duties  of  life  beyond.  Those  who  profit  most 
by  its  training  will  be  able  there  to  go  on  most  rapidly,  and 
with  the  more  advanced  studies  and  offices  of  their  new 
career. 

Both  systems  of  opini(^  acknowledge  the  present  work  of 
God,  or  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  the  system  which  believes  in 
a  historical  fall,  really  disbelieving  man's  ability,  gets  forced 
into  statements  which  make  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  seem 
external,  arbitrary,  and  mechanical.  It  picks  out  the  elect 
as  you  might  separate  sound  fruit  from  rotten,  the  fruit  all 
unconscious. 

The  other  system,  which  does  not  believe  in  the  fixed  and 
determinate  evil  of  human  nature,  holding  to  its  capacity  for 
improvement  always,  and  to  the  identity  of  its  essence  with 
the  nature  of  God  himself,  expresses  the  work  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  as  an  interfusion  of  the  life  of  God  with  the  life  of 
man.  It  is  not  an  arbitrary  lifting  from  without :  it  is  a 
swelling  of  the  pulses  of  life  within.  The  Spirit  does  not  lift 
up  the  soul,  as  you  lift  a  child  in  your  arms,  that  it  may  be  as 
tall  as  a  man  :  it  quickens  the  soul,  that  it  may  grow,  and 


63 


that,  by  this  divine  blessing,  the  child  may  become  a  man. 
It  does  not  single  out  one  live  wheat-grain  from  the  rest,  and, 
without  its  effort,  lay  it  away  ;  it  does  not  lift  such  selected 
wheat-grains  by  any  ingenious  machinery,  as  a  man  lifts 
his  corn  at  harvest-time,  by  an  elevator,  to  the  room  in 
his  warehouse  which  it  is  fit  for  :  it  stimulates  the  life  which 
is  latent  in  the  grain,  and  feeds  it  with  moisture,  and  feeds  it 
with  air,  that  it  may  gain  more  life  and  more,  and  that  it  may 
grow  itself  to  bring  forth  thirty,  sixty,  and  a  hundred  fold. 

I  say,  there  appears  this  difference  in  the  language  of  the 
two  schools.  But,  on  this  point,  I  do  not  think  they  are,  in 
fact,  so  far  apart  as  their  zealous  disputants  make  them  appear. 

But  this  habit  of  language  necessarily  drives  the  sterner 
leaders  of  the  shipwreck  hypothesis  into  statements  of  the 
work  of  redemption,  which  can  be  made  wholly  outside  of 
the  place  of  man  in  it.  Gradually,  but  certainly,  man  is 
removed  further  away.  At  last,  they  begin  to  talk  of  the 
redemption  of  man  as  a  drama  in  which  he  is  not  even  a  near 
spectator.  As  the  statements  become  more  philosophical,  an 
offended  God  satisfies  the  justice  of  a  just  God  by  uniting 
himself  with  a  human  form.  In  this  form  he  can  suffer  and 
die,  and  does  so.  He  sacrifices  himself,  that  this  just  God 
may  show  he  is  a  merciful  God,  and  that,  without  offence,  he 
may  come  as  the  Holy  Spirit  to  save  those  souls  which  else 
are  lost.  This  great  drama  is  performed  to  satisfy  the  host 
of  the  angels,  who  else  would  charge  a  merciful  God  with 
injustice  ;  and,  as  they  look  on,  man  also  beholds  the  scene, 
but  it  is  all  outside  of  him. 

The  other  school  of  opinion  holds  neither  views  nor  lan- 
guage which  keep  God  away  from  the  soul  of  man.  It 
regards  God  as  always  watching  and  interpenetrating  and 
blessing  every  soul,  even  of  the  darkest  savage,  or,  what  is 
worse,  of  the  meanest  child  of  civilization.  It  therefore 
makes  all  its  statements  of  atonement  and  redemption  centre 
in  the  work  which  is  wrought  on  these  several  souls.  A 
Saviour  who  goes  about  doing  good  does  it  for  these  starving 


64 


souls.  A  Saviour  who  weeps  consecrates  their  sorrow.  A 
Saviour  who  dies,  dies  to  bring  them  to  God.  A  Saviour 
rising  from  the  dead  lifts  them  to  a  new  life. 

And  here,  I  suppose,  is  the  centre  of  the  distinction  between 
us  and  high  Orthodoxy.  We  believe  the  work  of  the  atone- 
ment was  wrought  upon  men.  Calvin  certainly  regarded  it  as 
wrought  upon  God.  Of  his  admirers  in  our  day,  those  who 
partially  dissent  from  him  look  on  it  as  wrought  for  the  satis- 
faction of  the  angelic  host. 

At  this  point,  both  in  the  history  of  the  church  and  in  the 
smaller  history  of  each  generation  and  each  man,  comes  in 
the  separation  between  the  two  poles  as  to  the  person  of 
Christ.  If  the  whole  world  is  radically  tiirned  from  God, 
every  heart  hermetically  sealed  against  him ;  if  the  work  of 
man's  redemption  is  to  be  wrought  outside  of  man,  and  to  be 
the  satisfaction  of  an  infinite  God,  who  is  justly  offended  with 
this  defiant  race,  —  he  who  works  that  work  must  be,  they 
say,  the  equal  of  that  God.  Can  we  not,  then,  in  some  way, 
make  Christ  this  equal  ?  Can  we  not  make  him  God,  as  well 
as  the  Father  he  is  to  satisfy.  Here  is  it,  that,  in  history  or 
in  any  heart,  Trinitarianism  is  born. 

We,  on  the  other  hand,  to  whom  the  words,  "  I  believe  in 
God,  the  Father,"  really  mean,  God  is  my  Father,  and  I  am 
his  child,  —  in  our  belief  that  his  Spirit  ranges  at  will  through 
every  heart,  and  that  no  sin  is  obstacle  enough  to  keep  him 
out, — we  never  feel  this  necessity  of  lifting  Christ  to  be  equal 
with  God.  We,  therefore,  never  develop  that  doctrine  from 
the  Gospels.  It  is  confessed  on  all  sides,  that,  without 
development,  it  is  not  found  there.  We  believe  that  he  is 
the  Son  of  God,  and  our  Lord.  True,  in  the  same  sense  in 
which  we  say  the  true  church  is  one  with  God,  we  can  say 
that  Christ  is  one  with  God ;  but  we  do  not  say  he  is  God,  or 
the  equal  of  God.  And,  finding  no  necessity  to  describe  his 
nature,  we,  who  cannot  describe  our  own,  —  we  are  satisfied  to 
call  him,  what  the  creed  calls  him,  "  Jesus  Christ,  his  only 
Son,  our  Lord." 


65 


From  a  radical  difference  as  to  human  nature,  there  thus 
works  its  way  into  history  and  into  separate  behef  a  difference 
as  to  the  nature  of  the  Saviour.  It  comes  late  into  theology  ; 
four  centuries,  as  we  have  seen,  having  passed  before  the 
Orthodox  view  got  "  developed  "  from  the  Scripture  so  far 
as  to  be  defined.  It  is  not  the  original  difference  between 
the  two  schools,  but  is  rather  a  subordinate  diflference  which 
comes  in  in  the  unfolding  of  the  two. 

It  is  not  fair  to  say  that  either  of  these  great  systems  is 
merely  the  negation  of  the  other.  They  are  based  on  two 
different  principles :  they  differ,  therefore,  at  the  very  start, 
from  each  other ;  but  each  has  its  positive  elements,  clear  to 
all  but  bigot  eyes.  Neither  of  them  is  a  system  of  negations. 
Our  system  is  certainly  the  system  of  cheerfulness,  energy, 
action,  courage,  and  positive  progress.  Let  me  sum  up  the 
grand  points  around  which  it  crystallizes,  and  I  have  done. 

1.  "We  believe  in  God,  the  Father;"  meaning  God  our 
Father,  not  simply  the  Father  of  Jesus  Christ.  "VVe  believe 
that  every  attribute  of  fatherly  love  exists  in  him,  in  its  infi- 
nite perfection  ;  and  to  us,  therefore,  every  system  is  cer- 
tainly wrong  where  any  thing  militates  against  his  mercy 
unlimited,  his  love  unbound. 

2.  We  equally  believe,  that,  literally  and  completely,  we 
are  all  his  children ;  partakers  of  the  divine  nature,  whenever 
we  choose ;  and,  whether  we  choose  or  no,  made  in  his 
image.  We  cannot  help  the  divinity  that  makes  us  live. 
We  are  immortal ;  we  are  God-born ;  and,  so  far,  infinite 
beings.  There  is  no  point  in  advance  of  us  too  high  for  our 
aim. 

3.  We  believe  that  this  world  was  made  by  ovir  Father  as 
a  school  for  his  children.  We  use  it  as  he  means,  when  we 
train  ourselves  in  the  divine  Hfe  as  he  has  revealed  it  to  us. 
This  world  is  the  best  school  for  this  training.  It  is  not  a 
bower  of  roses ;  because  that  would  not  be  the  best  school. 
Nor  is  it  a  valley  of  horrors ;  for  a  perfect  Father  made  it 
for  his  children.     It  is  the  best  place  he  knew  how  to  arrange 

9 


66 


for  our  training  in  faith,  hope,  and  love ;  which  is  to  say,  in 
life  eternal. 

4.  As  that  Father  watched  this  school,  as  he  led  the  world 
along  in  its  gradual  development,  he  was  preparing  always 
for  the  moment  when  its  life  might  be  enlarged.  At  that 
moment,  he  sent  the  well-beloved  Son  into  it,  who  brings  to 
it  the  divine  life ;  and  all  who  come  to  him  catch  sparks  from 
him  of  that  electric  fire. 

5.  Whoever  catches  any  thing  of  this  life  from  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  will  gain  more  of  it  from  the  living  presence  of 
God,  here  and  now,  than  he  ever  had  before.  This  is  what 
one  gains  from  the  present  Holy  Spirit.  So  inspirited,  he 
will  gain  more  again  from  the  Lord  Jesus ;  and  then,  in  turn, 
yet  more  from  the  Spirit  of  truth.  Thus  the  true  child  is 
constantly  gaining  "  life  more  abundantly."  If  he  gets  any  of 
the  divine  life,  he  may  gain  more,  and  he  must  gain  more. 
Tliis  is  the  test  of  the  true  life.  An  essential  feature  of  it  is 
advance  fi:om  faith  to  faith,  from  hope  to  hope ;  yes,  fi:om 
glory  to  glory. 

Thus  recognizing  the  constant  affiliation  of  the  immortal 
children  with  their  infinite  Father,  and  his  constant  care  of 
them,  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  regard  death  as  the  critical 
central  transaction  which  it  is  in  the  other  theology.  It  is 
the  exchange  of  a  material  body  for  a  spiritual  body ;  but  it 
is  not  the  radical  change  of  the  child  of  God  who  passes 
through  it.  He  is  God's  child,  as  he  was  God's  child.  God 
did  take  care  of  him  :  God  does  take  care  of  him.  The  king- 
dom of  Heaven  was  at  hand  to  him  before  this  change  of  the 
tool  he  uses.  It  is  at  hand  in  the  new  body  which  he  uses  in 
the  new  world.  It  is  impossible  for  us  to  look  at  the  moment 
of  that  change  as  the  special  moment  for  which  we  are  to 
direct  our  plans,  or  offer  our  prayers.  We  begin  literally, 
here,  the  life  which  is  to  be  enlarging,  and  therefore  chan- 
ging, in  one  way  and  another,  through  all  time,  for  ever. 

To  such  practical  guides  of  life  does  our  theology  enlarge 
the  symbols  which  say,  "  I  believe  in  God,  the  Father ;  and  in 


67 


his  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  our  Lord ;  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost ; 
and  I  believe  in  life  everlasting."  Charge  them  full  with 
meaning,  and  let  this  meaning  show  itself  in  life,  and  they 
save  the  church  from  its  only  danger ;  that  is,  the  danger  of 
going  to  sleep  or  of  standing  still. 

For  the  church  is  lost,  when  it  deals  with  men  as  if  they 
were  only  creatures  of  this  world.  Leave  that  to  the  Epicu- 
reans, to  the  sensualists,  to  the  materialists.  Let  a  Christian 
chiu-ch  deal  with  men  as  immortal.  It  believes  in  life  ever- 
lasting. 

The  church  fails  again,  when,  in  its  philosophizing,  it  for- 
gets either  side  of  that  threefold  work  of  God  from  which  it 
is  bom.  It  believes  in  God,  the  Father,  who  mude  heaven 
and  earth ;  and  in  his  only  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  our  Lord  :  but 
if  it  so  believe  in  them  as  to  shut  out  the  present  Holy  Spirit, 
informing  us,  uplifting  us,  and  enlivening  us,  here  and  now, 
it  falls  asleep,  and  almost  dies.  So  sank  the  church  of  Eng- 
land in  the  beginning  of  the  last  century.  Or  the  church 
may  believe,  as  American  Orthodoxy  believes,  in  his  Son, 
Jesus  Christ,  our  Lord,  and  in  the  Holy  Spirit :  but  if  it  so 
believe  these  as  to  suppose  that  God  is  not  our  Father,  or  that 
he  did  not  really  make  for  us  this  world  on  which  we  tread ; 
if  it  suppose  that  Jesus  is  so  far  God,  that  the  Father  becomes 
a  "  distant,  cold,  impalpable  effluence,"  —  it  stumbles  into  the 
pit  where  American  Orthodoxy  is  now  groping.  From  that 
pit  it  will  emerge  only  when  it  sees  that  a  loving  Father 
made  all  things,  and  that,  therefore,  all  are  very  good.  Or 
perhaps  the  church  proclaims  God,  the  Father,  only ;  and  has 
no  great  care  for  the  new  life  sent  by  his  Son,  and  no  sense 
of  his  present  whisper  in  the  Spirit.  Then  it  stumbles  where 
the  English  Deists  stumbled,  and  their  friends  the  English 
Unitarians  of  the  last  century.  Then  it  needs  to  feel  the 
present  God  as  well  as  the  God  who  stretched  out  the  heavens 
and  the  seas ;  and  it  needs  to  catch  enlivenment  from  that 
life  of  Christ,  in  which,  in  human  effort,  God  had  manifested 
himself  as  he  had  before  in  the  things  that  he  had  made. 


68 


The  cliurch  advances  to  its  victory,  only  •when  it  recognizes, 
severally,  all  three  of  the  works  of  God,  —  the  work  of  crea- 
tion, the  work  of  redemption,  and  the  present  work  of  his 
present  Spuit.  The  church  is  weak,  and  it  falls,  when  it 
proclaims  only  one  or  two  of  these,  or  when  it  makes  one  out 
of  all  three  together.  As  its  victory  grows  more  imposing ; 
as  it  ties  sin  with  tighter  cords,  and  holds  it  back  more  as- 
suredly, —  the  more  certainly  will  it  see  the  threefold  sources 
of  the  fountains  of  its  life ;  the  more  surely  will  it  avoid  the 
robbery  of  balancing  the  one  of  these  against  the  other,  or 
of  trying  to  absorb  the  one  by  the  other.  Its  statement  of 
creed  will  come  back  to  the  shortest :  "  I  believe  in  God,  the 
Father ;  and  in  Jesus  Christ,  his  Son  ;  and  in  the  Holy 
Spirit."  And,  for  its  paean  of  triumph,  it  will  not  turn  into 
one  shrine  or  another  or  another,  as  if  God  could  be  jealous 
of  his  Son,  or  as  if  Jesus  could  be  jealous  of  his  Father; 
but  in  the  great  open  temple  of  his  love,  when  that  day  of 
victory  comes,  not  sinking  into  any  monotone  of  unison,  it 
will  pour  forth  its  praises  in  the  triple  chord  of  harmony,  — 

"  Glory  be  to  the  Father, 
And  to  the  Son, 
And  to  the  Holy  Ghost, 
As  it  icas  in  the  beginning,  is  now,  and  ever  shall  be,  world  vrithout  end. 

Amen." 


IQQO 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hilgard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


